Notes

doi:10.1525/california/9780520273344.002.0013

Introduction

See, e.g.,

Richard H. Mitchell, Censorship in Imperial Japan (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983)

;

Jay Rubin, Injurious to Public Morals: Writers and the Meiji State (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1984)

;

Gregory James Kasza, The State and the Mass Media in Japan, 1918–1945 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988)

; and

James Huffman, Creating a Public: People and Press in Meiji Japan (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1997)

. Although the publishing laws were publicly known, their changing enforcement was misunderstood by the public and the publishing world. The censor's office periodically would redefine standards in secret memos and these policy shifts would seem arbitrary to producers of cultural material. See, e.g., the 1930 Mid-Year Overview Report of the Publishing Police, which elaborates standards for censorship that include both the obvious protections against incitement and agitation for revolution and the restraint on introducing methods of abortion as well as the less clear stipulations against “defaming the prestige or honor of foreign dignitaries” and “arousing allure for the red-light districts and other bad areas.” In a section on “special standards,” the report also notes other circumstances that the censor should take into consideration, such as the “scope of readership,” “number of copies issued and the social impact,” “timing of the issuing,” “locality of distribution,” and “number of improper passages.” “Shōwa go nenjū ni okeru shuppan keisatsu gaikan” (1930), reprinted in

Shuppan keisatu gaikan, ed. Naimushō keihokyoku, vol. 1 (Tokyo: Fuji shuppan, 1988)

See, e.g.,

Kamei Hideo's portrayal in “Tokunōgorō to ken'etsu,” in Tokushū hisenryōka no gengo kūkan, special issue, Bungaku 4.5 (2003): 87

. See also

Taniguchi Akihiro, “Dazai Osamu zenshū no seiritsu: ken'etsu to honbun (Tokushū senryōki no ken'etsu to bungaku),” Intelligence 8 (April 2007): 24–34, quote on 27

Jacques Derrida, Archive Fever: A Freudian Impression, Religion and Postmodernism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996)

From the Library of Congresses “Censored Japanese Serials of the Pre-1946 Period” collection scheduled for microfilming and return to the National Diet Library and designated with the MOJ76.689 designation. Call Number: CLC Ser Z6958. J3. N3 PN4705 Japan.

Taki Yōsaku “Sonae yo! Toki da,” Puroretaria shishū 2, reprinted in Nihon Puroretaria Bungakushū (Tokyo: Shin Nihon Shuppansha, 1987), 39: 225–26.

Etō Jun, Jiyū to kinki (Tokyo: Kawade Shobō Shinsha, 1984), 287–88.

Edward Said, After the Last Sky: Palestinian Lives (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999), 53.

Honda Shūgo, “‘Mujōken kōfuku’ no imi,” Bungei, September 1978

Jay Rubin, “From Wholesomeness to Decadence: The Censorship of Literature under the Allied Occupation,” Journal of Japanese Studies 11.1 (Winter 1985): 71–103.

10.2307/132230

Katō Norihiro, Haisengoron (Tokyo: Kōdansha, 1997)

;

Nishio Kanji, GHQ no funsho tosho kaifū (Tokyo: Tokuma shoten, 2008)

10.

This apparent contradiction is easily resolved by a consideration of Etō's own flirtations with Jean-Jacques Pauvert, who writes, “Censorship is one of those convenient words which are widely used today because they allow people to seem, with a minimum of effort, decent and right-thinking, the same as everyone else these days. The Left, the Right, and the Centre all agree that one should be anti-censorship, anti-war, anti-racism, pro-human rights or freedom of expression.” Cited in Helen Freshwater, “Towards a Redefinition of Censorship,” in Censorship and Cultural Regulation in the Modern Age, ed.

Beate Muller, Critical Studies 22.1 (October 2003): 237.

For an example of Etō's early tendencies, see, e.g.,

Etō Jun, Natsume Sōseki, Sakkaron shiriizu (Tokyo: Raifusha, 1956), passim

11.

See tape-recorded radio address by

Byron Price and J. H. Ryan, February 20, 1943, National Archives Identifier: 116629. See also “Private Snafu: Censored,” in Army-Navy Screen Magazine 31 (1944), National Archives Identifier: 36197

12.

Etō Jun, “The Sealed Linguistic Space: The Occupation Censorship and Post-War Japan, Part I,” ed. and trans. Jay Rubin, in Hikaku bunka zasshi: Annual of Comparative Culture 2 (1984): 11.

See also

Etō Jun, Tozasareta gengo kūkan: Senryōgun no ken'etsu to sengo Nihon, Bunshun bunko E-2–8 (Tokyo: Bungei Shunjū, 1998), 58–59.

13.

Etō, “The Sealed Linguistic Space,” 14.

See also

Etō Jun, “The Constraints of the 1946 Constitution,” Japan Echo 8.1 (Spring 1981): 45.

14.

Nagai Kafū, “Kyakuhon ken'etsu mondai no hihan,” Shin engei, September 1922, reprinted in Kafū zenshū (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1962), 27: 106–7.

15.

The January 1930 issue of the Publishing Police Report lists several means of controlling what was issued (sashidome) that would precede any ban, including jitatsu (instruction), keikoku (warning), and kondan (meeting). These procedures were neither legislated nor generally explained outside the secretive confines of the office of censorship.

16.

These meetings were variously known as bungei kondankai (arts colloquium) and konwakai (forum for discussion). Other means of mitigation included a system of kanpu (returns) under which producers could lodge formal requests for the return of seized books on the condition of cutting or revising them before release.

17.

Toshio Nishi, Unconditional Democracy: Education and Politics in Occupied Japan, 1945–1952 (Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, 1982)

18.

Edward W. Said, “An Interview with Edward W. Said,” boundary 2 20.1 (Spring 1993): 21.

19.

Pierre Bourdieu, “Censorship and the Imposition of Form,” in Language and Symbolic Power, ed. John B. Thompson, trans. Gino Ramond and Matthew Adamson (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1991), 138.

20.

Karatani Kōjin, “Ken'etsu to kindai Nihon bungaku,” in Sai toshite no basho, Kōdansha gakujutsu bunko (Tokyo: Kōdansha, 1996), 108.

For a discussion of Karatani's argument, see chapter .

21.

Slavoj Žižek, The Sublime Object of Ideology (London: Verso, 1989), 36.

22.

Edward W. Said, “Criticism between Culture and System,” in The World, the Text, and the Critic (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1983), 221.

23.

Michael Holquist, “Corrupt Originals: The Paradox of Censorship,” in Literature and Censorship, special issue, PMLA 109.1 (1994): 22.

24.

See

Rubin, “From Wholesomeness to Decadence”; and the proceedings of the International symposium in Tokyo, November 21, 1982

, in

Takakuwa Kokichi, Etō Jun, Jay Rubin, Isoda Koichi, Yamamoto Shichihei, “Kokusai shinpojiumu ‘Nihon senryō kenkyū’: Makkāsā no ken'etsu,” Shokun! 15.4 (April 1984): 141–46.

Rubin presented an English version of the talk at the University of Washington as “Japanese Literature under Two Censorships: Prewar and Postwar” on January 21, 1983. A truncated English-language version is available at the Harvard-Yenching Library in Box 1 of the “Professor Jay Rubin research materials, censorship (Meiji period-pre-war).”

25.

Peter Kornicki, The Book in Japan: A Cultural History from the Beginnings to the Nineteenth Century (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2001), 225–44.

26.

See particularly proclamations 358 and 451 of 1868 and 1869. These precursors to the publication laws of the 1880s and 1910s established the institutions that continued to police the Japanese publishing industry even under the auspices of Occupation censorship after the war.

27.

My periodization was to a great extent influenced by the groundbreaking work of John Dower that examines transwar continuities. See, e.g.,

John Dower, “The Useful War,” in Japan in War and Peace: Selected Essays (New York: W. W. Norton, 1993), 9–32.

But I want to distance myself from some of his conclusions, which have been published in his mainstream English-language narrative of the

Occupation, Embracing Defeat: Japan in the Wake of World War II (New York: W. W. Norton, 1999)

. Though many of Dower's various narratives of Japanese complicity with their own occupation appear to have nothing to do with the dominating power of the United States per se, they do not displace the underlying modes of power domination that also and most significantly led to an embrace of defeat.

28.

Ronald Schleifer, Intangible Materialism: The Body, Scientific Knowledge, and the Power of Language (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2009)

Chapter 1

The National Diet Library Law issued on February 9, 1948, stated clearly that the institution was “established as a result of the firm conviction that truth makes us free and with the object of contributing to international peace and the democratization of Japan as promised in our Constitution” (emphasis added). See the “Kankei hōki” and “Shinri ga warera o jiyū ni suru” pages on the National Diet Library website.

Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1984), xi, 57–63;

Alexander Gelley, Unruly Examples: On the Rhetoric of Exemplarity (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995), 2.

Inamura Tetsugen, “Hakkin tosho mokuroku: 1945 nen izen no igi, ‘Shuppan no jiyū’ no shōgen mono toshite,” Sensō to toshokan shiryō (tokushū) Toshokan zasshi, ed. Nihon toshokan kyōkai, 74.8 (1980): 380–81.

Many of these seized books were destroyed by violence: the warehouse in which they were stored was bombed in January 1945.

Yoshiko Yoshimura, ed., Censored Japanese Serials of the Pre-1946 Period: A Checklist of the Microfilm Collection (Ken'etsu Wazasshi [1945-Nen Izen]: Maikurofirumu Chekkurisuto) (Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, 1994), 221n7

In a realization of Roger Chartier's notion that “the fear of obliteration” spurred on the preservation of writing, the point of this new policy was clearly to preserve the books through any future tragedies.

Roger Chartier, Inscription and Erasure: Literature and Written Culture from the Eleventh to the Eighteenth Century, trans. Arthur Goldhammer (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2007), vii.

For instance, the July 1931 Police Report explains that a proletarian book, Senryaku senjutsu ketsugi roku (Record of agreed-upon strategies and tactics), was banned because it exactly repeated the content of another banned book from April 1930.

Odagiri Hideo and Fukuoka Seikichi, eds., Shōwa shoseki zasshi shinbun hakkin nenpyō (Kawasaki: Meiji Bunken Shiryō Kankōkai, 1981), 1:213.

Umehara Hokumei, ed., Kidan chinbun dai shūsei: Meiji Taishō (Tokyo: Bungei Ichibasha, Shigakkan Shokyoku, 1931)

;

Umehara Hokumei, ed., Kindai sesō zenshi (Tōkyō: Hakuhōsha, 1931)

“Hatsubai hanpu kinshibon no yukue Shōwa 15 nen,” Daigaku no toshokan 16.1 (1997): 1.

Yoshimura, Censored Japanese Serials, vii.

10.

Edward J. Drea, Researching Japanese War Crimes Records: Introductory Essays (Washington, DC: Nazi War Crimes and Japanese Imperial Government Records Interagency Working Group, 2006)

11.

Wada Atsuhiko lists six schools involved in the program: Northwestern University; Claremont University; University of California, Berkeley; Yale University; and University of Michigan. Harvard's nonparticipation reveals the fluidity in the interlibrary book trade regardless of origin and history.

Wada Atsuhiko, Shomotsu no nichi-bei kankei: riterashī-shi ni mukete (Tokyo: Shin'yōsha, 2007), 196.

12.

Otaki Noritada, “Senzenki Shuppan Keisatsu Hōseika No Toshokan: Sono Etsuran Kinshibon Ni Tsuite No Rekishiteki Sobyō,” Sankō shoshi kenkyū 2.1 (1971)

;

Otaki Noritada and Keiji Tsuchiya, “Teikoku toshokan bunsho ni miru senzenki shuppan keisatsu Hōsei No Ichi Sokumen,” Sankō shoshi kenkyū 12.3 (1976)

13.

Asaoka Kunio, “Ken'etsu hon no yukue: Chiyoda toshokan kura ‘Naimushō itakubon’ o megutte,” Chūkyō daigaku toshokan kiyō 29 (2008): 1–21.

14.

Yokote Kazuhiko, “1940 nendai bungaku e no shironteki kōsatsu: gunjiteki heiiki, sakusha, hyōgen, ken'etsu seidō (kindai bungaku ni okeru ‘sakusha’),” Kokugo to kokubungaku 77.5 (2000): 148–58.

15.

Shuppan keisatsuhō, 41 vols. (Tokyo: Fuji Shuppan, 1981);

Shuppan keisatsu shiryō, 15 vols. (Tokyo: Fuji Shuppan, 1982)

;

Shuppan keisatsu kankei shiryō shūsei, 8 vols. (Tokyo: Fuji Shuppan, 1986)

;

Shōwa nenchū ni okeru, shuppan keisatsu gaikan, 3 vols. (Tokyo: Fuji Shuppan, 1988)

16.

Jacques Derrida, Archive Fever: A Freudian Impression, Religion and Postmodernism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), 52.

17.

Though some banned works from the period before the earthquake exist in the current collection, most of those were banned retroactively in the postquake period. Of the more than 1,700 banned books still held at the Library of Congress, only 41 were first published before 1923. Of the more than 1,800 banned titles now held at the National Diet Library, only 22 date from before the quake.

18.

See “Home Ministry Keihokyoku censorship collection” in the Library of Congress Catalog; “

500” and “

501” in the NDL-OPAC Catalog;

Odagiri Hideo and Fukuoka Seikichi, Shōwa shoseki zasshi shinbun hakkin nenpyō, Zōhōban ed. (Kawasaki-shi: Meiji Bunken Shiryō Kankōkai, 1981)

;

Yokote Kazuhiko, “Ichiranhyō senzen senjiki hiken'etsu bungaku sakuhin shobun risuto,” Heiwa bunka kenkyū 23 (2003): 153–76;

Yoshimura, Censored Japanese Serials; Yoshiko Yoshimura, ed., Japanese Government Documents and Censored Publications: A Checklist of the Microfilm Collection (Washington, D.C.: Library of Congress, 1992)

;

Atsuhiko, Shomotsu no nichi-bei kankei, 183–213;

Yui Masaomi, ed., Shuppan keisatsu kankei shiryō kaisetsu, sōmokuji (Tokyo: Fuji Shuppan, 1983), 58;

Yoshimura, Japanese Government Documents, 221.

In addition, and perhaps most significantly for literary study, the numbers represent only banned books, not serials, though periodicals were the major venue for literary debuts in the period and were banned with fervor.

19.

Tetsugen, “Hakkin tosho mokuroku,” 380.

20.

Yoshiko Yoshimura notes the absorption of many volumes into the general collection, many of which were cataloged with the subject heading “Home Ministry keihokyoku censorship collection.” These are retrievable with computer searches. These 1,115 titles are known. However, of the 5,046 volumes first brought to the United States, only 2,209 titles have been cataloged as banned (the 1,115 still held at the Library of Congress and the 1,094 returned to the National Diet Library). So in theory at least 2,837 (5,046 minus 2,209) books have been integrated into the Library of Congress general collection without reference to their having been censored or having come from the Home Ministry archive. See

Yoshimura, Censored Japanese Serials, 220.

See also

Yui, Shuppan keisatsu kankei, 39.

35.

Running a standard mathematical correlation between the literature published over the period as a percentage of the total books published and the literature banned as a percentage of total literature banned, I have derived a statistically insignificant correlation coefficient of −0.26. A mathematically insignificant correlation between the heightened bans and the amount of literary books actually published during the period, even when we account for the changes over the period in publications, in general helps to make the case that bans had a negligible effect on the quantity of literature published for the period.

36.

Werner Hamacher, “One 2 Many Multiculturalisms,” in Violence, Identity, and Self-Determination, ed. Hent de Vries and Samuel Weber (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997), 311.

37.

Moretti, “Graphs, Maps, Tree,” 67–68.

38.

David Greetham, “‘Who's In, Who's Out’: The Cultural Poetics of Archival Exclusion,” Studies in the Literary Imagination 32.1 (March 1999): 2.

39.

The revised, second edition, which was also censored, is available in the NDL Home Ministry collections.

40.

This term, shizen funsho (), was suggested by the literature scholar Komori Yōichi in a personal conversation on June 11, 2002.

41.

Nishio Kanji, GHQ no funsho tosho kaifū (Tokyo: Tokuma shoten, 2008)

42.

See, e.g., Hasegawa Ryō, Nichibei kaisen no shinsō (The facts about the outbreak of war between Japan and America), Dai-Nippon Shuppan; Araki Sadao, Teikoku no gunjin seishin (The spirit of the imperial soldier), Chōfūsha; Yamada Yoshio, Kokutai no hongi (Underlying principles of the national polity), Hō bunkan; Mushakōji Saneatsu, Daitōa sensō shikan (Personal impressions of the Great East Asian War), Kawade Shobo.

43.

See

Rengōkokugun sōshireibu kara bosshū o meizerareta senden yō kankōbutsu sōmokuroku: gojūonjun (General index of publications for propaganda purposes, subject to confiscation by the Directive of the SCAP) (Tokyo: Monbushō Shakai Kyōikukyoku, 1948)

Senryōshi Kenkyūkai, GHQ no bosshū o manugareta hon: tosho mokuroku (Kamakura-shi: Sawazu shuppan, 2007)

44.

Among the books on the list to be confiscated are Itō Sei, Sensō no bungaku, Zenkoku Shobō; Watsuji Tetsurō, Nihon no shindō, Amerika no kokuminsei, Chikuma Shobo; Kikuchi Kan, Ni-sen roppyaku nen shisshō, Dōmei Tsūshinsha; Yanagita Kunio, Shintō to minzokugaku, Meiseidō Shoten.

45.

Bunka Hōkōkai, ed., Dai tōa sensō rikugun hōdō han'in shuki (Tokyo: Kōdansha, 1943)

46.

Press, Publications and Broadcast Division, SCAP Civil Intelligence Section: Press, Censorship (Books), National Archives and Records Administration, NWCTM-331-UD1803–855, RG 331, UD 1803, Box 8655. Folder 10.

47.

Ozaki Shirō, “Hitobunshi no kokuhaku,” in Ozaki Shirō zenshū, vol. 12 (Tokyo: Kōdansha, 1965)

48.

Richard Burt, “Introduction: The ‘New’ Censorship,” in The Administration of Aesthetics: Censorship, Political Criticism, and the Public Sphere, ed. Richard Burt, Social Text Collective (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1994), xvii–xviii.

49.

Slavoj Žižek, The Sublime Object of Ideology (New York: Verso, 1989), 141;

Harry D. Harootunian, Overcome by Modernity: History, Culture, and Community in Interwar Japan (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000), xxix.

Chapter 2

See, e.g.,

Shuppan keisatsuhō, 41 vols. (Tokyo: Fuji Shuppan, 1981)

;

Shuppan keisatsu shiryō, 15 vols. (Tokyo: Fuji Shuppan, 1982)

;

Shuppan keisatsu kankei shiryō shūsei, 8 vols. (Tokyo: Fuji Shuppan, 1986)

;

Shōwa nenchū ni okeru, shuppan keisatsu gaikan, 3 vols (Tokyo: Fuji Shuppan, 1988)

Saitō Shōzō, “Shuppan keisatsu hō,” October 1928, reprinted in Shomotsushi Tenbō (Tokyo: Yagi Shoten, 1955), 84–85.

This was also reprinted in

Gotō Kenji, ed., Saitō Shōzō Chosakushū (Tachikawa: Yashio Shoten, 1980), 5:84–85.

Yui Masaomi, ed., Shuppan keisatsu kankei shiryō kaisetsu, sōmokuji (Tokyo: Fuji Shuppan, 1983), 58.

In fact, the numbers suggest that in relation to the gains of other classifications, the increases in literature actually can be seen as relative decreases across the board.

Saitō Shōzō, ed., Gendai hikka bunken dai nenpyō (Tokyo: Suikodō, 1932), 4.

Otaki Noritada has taken up the project since the 1970s and made indexing the work of the imperial censors his lifework, which he hopes to complete soon. Otaki Noritada, personal interview with author, July 10, 2008, Tokyo.

The figure does not include, e.g., the following other related works:

Miyatake Gaikotsu, Hikkashi (Tokyo: Asakaya shoten, 1926)

;

Haga Eizō, Meiji Taishō Hikkashi (Tokyo: Bunkōsha, 1924)

;

Haga Eizō, Meiji, Taishō, Shōwa Hikkashi (Tokyo: Jissai kagakusha, 1927)

;

Jō Ichirō, Hakkinbon hyakunen: Shomotsu ni miru ningen no jiyū (Tokyo: Tōgensha, 1969)

;

Jō Ichirō, Yonezawa Yoshihiro, and Takahashi Yōji, Hakkinbon: Meiji, Taishō, Shōwa, Heisei: Jō Ichirō Korekushon, Bessatsu Taiyō (Tokyo: Heibonsha, 1999)

;

Jō Ichirō and Yonezawa Yoshihiro, Hakkinbon II: Chikabon No Sekai, Bessatsu Taiyō (Tokyo: Heibonsha, 2001)

;

Jō Ichirō and Yonezawa Yoshihiro, Hakkinbon III: Shugi Shumi Shukyo, Bessatsu Taiyō (Tokyo: Heibonsha, 2002)

For more on the relationship of the censor to onomastics, see chapter 9.

Saitō, Kindai bungei hikkashi (Tokyo: Sūbundō, 1924)

;

Haga, Meiji Taishō Hikkashi; Akama Tōhō, ed., Kinshibon shomoku (Kyōto: Akama kōbundō, 1927)

;

Tosho shūhō henshūbu, ed., Meiji Taishō hatsubai kinshi shomoku (Tokyo: Kotensha, 1932)

;

Saitō Shōzō, ed., Gendai hikka bunken dai nenpyō; Itō Chikusui, ed., Meiji Taishō Shōwa bungei hikka sakuin, special issue, Ikamo no shumi, dai 4 tokugō (Tokyo: Suikodō, 1935)

;

Odagiri Hideo, ed., Hakkin sakuhinshū (Tokyo: Yakumo Shoten, 1948)

;

Odagiri Hideo, ed., Hakkin sakuhinshū, 2nd ed. (Tokyo: Hokushindō, 1956)

;

Odagiri Hideo, ed., Zoku hakkin sakuhinshū (Tokyo: Hokushindō, 1957)

;

Odagiri Hideo and Fukuoka Seikichi, eds., Shōwa shoseki zasshi shinbun hakkin nenpyō, Zōhōban ed. (Kawasaki: Meiji Bunken Shiryō Kankōkai, 1981)

. For a cursory overview and pictorial of some of the covers of these titles, see

Jō, Hakkinbon II, 152–57.

For another list of research on banned literature contemporaneous with censorship, see Saitō's preface to his list compiled in 1932.

10.

Odagiri, Shōwa shoseki zasshi shinbun hakkin nenpyō, 1:158.

11.

Ibid.

, 1:510.

12.

See

Edward Thomas Mack II, “The Value of Literature: Cultural Authority in Interwar Japan” (Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 2002), 165–89.

13.

Saitō, “Jijo,” in Gendai hikka bunken dai nenpyō, 3.

14.

Carol Gluck, “The Fine Folly of the Encyclopedists,” in Currents in Japanese Culture: Translations and Transformations, ed. Amy Vladeck Heinrich (New York: Columbia University Press, 1997), 243.

Inamura, Tetsugen, “Hakkinbon mokuroku no shūhen,” in Kindai hon ni okeru hakkinbon to sono shūhen tansaku tokugō (Osaka: Naniwa shorin kōsho mokuroku, 1980), 10:12.

15.

Osatake Takeki, “Jo,” in Saitō, Gendai hikka bunken dai nenpyō, n.p.

16.

Akama, Kinshibon shomoku, n.p., emphasis added

17.

Odagiri, Hakkin sakuhinshū, 3.

18.

Akama, Kinshibon shomoku, n.p.

19.

David Greetham, “‘Who's In, Who's Out’: The Cultural Poetics Of Archival Exclusion,” Studies in the Literary Imagination 32.1 (Spring 1999): 1–28.

20.

Itō, Meiji Taishō Shōwa bungei hikka sakuin, n.p.

21.

Tachibana Takahirō, “Jo,” in Saitō, Gendai hikka bunken dai nenpyō, n.p.

22.

Saitō, “Jijo,” n.p.

23.

Osatake, “Jo,” n.p., emphasis added

10.2979/RAL.2006.37.3.28

. For his views on banning, see

Osatake Takeki, “Nihon tosho zasshi hakkinshi,” in Sōgō janarizumu kōza (Tokyo: Naigaisha, 1930–31)

24.

See, e.g., Etō Jun's criticism of the list of banned books included in the Nihon kindai bungaku dai jiten (Great encyclopedia of modern Japanese literature), which though published years after the Occupation repeats what is for Etō the most important stipulation of that censorship system: that reference to censorship should not be made. Although Etō's sharp criticism is well taken, after some statistical analysis one could possibly find that the relative lack of books listed as banned under the Occupation censorship may reflect the fact that statistically fewer literary books were actually banned during the three-year height of Occupation censorship than in the prior seventy years.

Etō Jun, “Amerika wa Nihon de no ken'etsu o ika ni junbi shite ita ka” (1982)

, reprinted in Tozasareta gengo kūkan: Senryō no ken'etsu to sengo, Nihon, Bunshun bunko (Tokyo: Bungei shunjū, 1994), 11–12. See also his early paper mentioning the collection:

Etō Jun, “The Civil Censorship in Occupied Japan,” in Hikaku bunka zasshi: Annual of Comparative Culture 1 (1982): 3–4,

reprinted in

Etō Jun, “The Censorship Operation in Occupied Japan,” in Press Control around the World, ed. Jane Leftwich Curry and Joan Dassin (New York: Praeger, 1982), 238.

25.

Akama, Kinshibon shomoku

, n.p.

26.

Saitō, “Jijo,” 1–2.

27.

Itō, Meiji Taishō Shōwa bungei hikka sakuin

, n.p.

28.

Ibid.

29.

He goes on to list many others including Aoyama's novella

(Seaside people) and Inoue Tatsuzō's

(Emancipation of men).

Odagiri, Zoku hakkin sakuhinshū, 242.

30.

Odagiri, “Atogaki,” in Odagiri and Fukuoka, Shōwa shoseki zasshi shinbun hakkin nenpyō, 3:1–2.

31.

Thomas Richards, The Imperial Archive: Knowledge and the Fantasy of Empire (New York: Verso, 1993)

32.

Jean Baudrillard, Simulacra and Simulation, trans. Sheila Faria Glaser (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1994), 23.

33.

Some lists also add the author, date of first publication, and the reasoning (law) under which the ban took place.

34.

Walter Benjamin, “The Collector,” in The Arcades Project (Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2002), 207.

35.

Odagiri's coeditor Fukuoka Seikichi is here not to be forgotten, since it is he who seems to have done the lion's share of the research while Odagiri's name, clout, and determination certainly played a formidable role in the list's eventual publication.

36.

Saitō Shōzō, ed., Meiji bungei sokumenshō, vol. 1 (Yokohama: Jugaisha, 1916)

; vol. 2 (Los Angeles: Hakubundō shoten, 1916); vol. 3 (Tokyo: Sokumensha, 1916). According to the colophons of all extant volumes, the books were “not for sale” (

37.

Saitō Shōzō, “Nihon hakkin bungei kō,” Amatoria, August 1958, 1–2.

The anxiety of completeness is echoed in Saitō's preface to volume 11 of his Hentai jūnishi (1927): “Even though this book was compiled as only one volume of the Hentai jūnishi collection, it was banned from being sold and distributed before it was published. And in the end the complete book could not be seen, so we endeavored to preserve the galleys; nevertheless, we could not get from page 2 up through 53 of the total 150 pages; so it is all the more incomplete.” Reprinted in

Jō, Yonezawa, and Takahashi, Hakkinbon: Meiji, Taishō, Shōwa, Heisei, 83.

38.

Odagiri, Zoku hakkin sakuhinshū, 240–41.

39.

Odagiri and Fukuoka, Shōwa shoseki zasshi shinbun hakkin nenpyō, 3:3.

40.

Akama, Kinshibon shomoku, n.p.

41.

Saitō, “Jijo,” n.p

42.

Osatake, “Jo,” n.p

10.2979/RAL.2006.37.3.28

43.

We would do well to remember, along with the unprecedented publication of the “complete” works of Marx and Engels, the banning of certain other works by Marx (not to mention those by Engels, Lenin, and others) in the years during the publication of the set:

Karl Marx, Jiyū bōeki mondai, trans. Tobari Hiroshi (Kyōto: Kōbundō Shobō, 1928)

;

Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Kyōsantō sengen, De Riyazanofu hyōchū, trans. Ōtaguro Kenkyūjo, 4th ed. (Tokyo: Kasai Shoten, 1932)

;

Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Marukusu Engerusu “shiteki yuibutsuron” shū (Tokyo: Kibōkaku, n.d.

);

Karl Marx, Frederick Engels, et al., Marukusu shugi no shūkyō hihan: Marukusu, Engerusu, Rênin, Purehanofu, Buharin ronshū, ed. Asano Kenshin (Tokyo: Daitō Shuppansha, 1931)

;

Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Kyōsan shugi to wa nanzo ya, trans. Sakai Toshihiko (Tokyo: Hakuyōsha, 1931)

;

Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Marukusu Engerusu kisō XXX sengen (Tokyo: Nihon Puroretaria Kagaku Dōmei, 1933)

;

Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Marukusu Engerusu shiteki yuibutsuron taikei, ed. Heruman Dounkeru, trans. Inomata (Tokyo: Kōshinsha, 1932)

;

Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Marukusu Engerusu Kyōsantō sengen, trans. Ōura Kiyomitsu, Riyazanofu hyōchū (Tokyo: Puroretaria Shōbō, 1931)

;

Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, Shakai shisō zenshū, vol. 18 (Tokyo: Heibonsha, 1928)

44.

Miriam Rom Silverberg, Changing Song: The Marxist Manifestos of Nakano Shigeharu (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990), 165.

One could even look at the confiscation of the early publication by the old NAPF (Nippona Artista Proleta Federacio) of the Nakano Shigeharu shishū during this period as proof of the anomaly that the publication of the Marx collection represents. It also gives an idea of the sporadic nature of censorship, which had overlooked the Nakano poems at first when published individually before the seizure. For more on the seizure, see

Tsuboi Shigeji, “Bunka tōsō to ken'etsu seido ni tai suru ronsō” Puroretaria bunka, February 1932, reprinted in Tsuboi Shigeji zenshū, ed. Tsuboi Shigeji Zenshū Henshū Iinkai, Shohan ed. (Tokyo: Seijisha, 1988), 215;

Akiyama Kiyoshi, Hakkin shishū (Tokyo: Chōbunsha, 1970), 130–38.

45.

We should also note Arai Tetsu's view that though in theory some things should be banned, in practice it is easy for them to fall through the cracks.

Arai Tetsu, “Ken'etsukan to kataru,” in Arai Tetsu no zen shigoto: Uchino Kenji jidai o fukumu teikō no shi to hyōron (Tokyo: Arai Tetsu Chosaku Kankō Iinkai, 1983), 285.

46.

Itō, Meiji Taishō Shōwa bungei hikka sakuin

, n.p.

47.

Odagiri, Hakkin sakuhinshū, 1.

48.

Odagiri, Zoku hakkin sakuhinshū, 239.

49.

Saitō Shōzō, Hakkinbon ōrai (Tokyo: Shochiōraisha, 1960), 3.

50.

Publications and Broadcast Division SCAP Civil Intelligence Section: Press, Censorship (Books), National Archives and Records Administration, NWCTM-331-UD1803–855, RG 331, UD 1803, Box 8655. The offending selections were a letter to Mukyu Kimura and a collection of marching songs by Kozaka Kukoku and Kodama Kagai.

51.

It also happens to be the last year that statistics for banned books were printed along with statistics of books published.

52.

Etō is not the only one for whom this is true. Katō Norihiro and Nishio Kanji follow in his steps. See

Katō Norihiro, Nihon no mushisō (Tokyo: Heibonsha, 2001)

;

Nishio Kanji, GHQ no funsho tosho kaifū (Tokyo: Tokuma shoten, 2008), passim

Chapter 3

Tosaka Jun, “Ken'etsuka no shisō to fūzoku” (1936), reprinted in Tosaka Jun zenshū (Tokyo: Keiso shobō, 1966), 5:80.

Jay Rubin, Injurious to Public Morals: Writers and the Meiji State (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1984), 231;

Gregory James Kasza, The State and the Mass Media in Japan, 1918–1945 (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988), 35.

See, e.g., Chūō kōron 43.10 (October 1928) and 43.12 (December 1928); Kaizō 8.10 (September 1926);

Shuzai ken'etsu seido hihan kōenkai (Tokyo: Asahi Shinbun, 1929)

; Kindai hikka bunkengō, special issue, Bungei shijō 2.11 (November 1926); and Futō ken'etsu hantai tokugō, special issue, Puroretaria geijutsu 1.3 (September 1927), among others.

For example, on November 16, 1932, the fourth volume of Hosokawa Karoku's A Course in the History of the Development of Capitalism was banned not only for “praising the Marxist and Leninist dialectal materialism” but also for the seditious

“passages that lavish praising interpretations on previously banned publications.” Shuppan keisatsuhō (Tokyo: Ryūkei Shosha, 1932), n51

. As early as the January 1928 Publishing Police Report (Shuppan keisatsu hō), the calls for reform of the censorship system were noted as objectionable by the censors. The December 1934 issue lists recent problems with leftist thought, including increased demands for freedom of expression. The following volume in the Library of Congress collection of examination copies was banned for an article that called for the end of the censorship system in 1934:

Hisaita Eijirō and Ikeda Seiji, Engeki undō no atarashiki hatten no tame ni (Tokyo: Nihon Puroretaria Engeki Dōmei Shuppanbu, 1934), 49.

The September 1935 issue of the Publishing Police Materials (Shuppan keisatsu shiryō) lists a number of publications about the controls on the press. The July 1936 issue cites an article on freedom of the press in Chūō Kōron.

I have elected to quote from the nonstandard “original” rather than the canonically collected version of the text available in the zenshū and various translated editions, for reasons that will become apparent in the following section, “Of Fuseji, Fug, and other Fig Leaves.”

Akutagawa Ryūnosuke, “Kappa,” Kaizō March 1927, digitized from reprint in Kappa: Aru ahō no isshō. (Tokyo: Ōbunsha, 1984)

, available at the Aozora bunko website. See also

Akutagawa Ryūnosuke, “Kappa,” in Akutagawa Ryūnosuke zenshū (Tokyo: Iwanami, 1978), 8:314.

Akutagawa, at the Aozora bunko website; see also

Akutagawa, “Kappa,” 8:325.

See

Karl Marx, “On Freedom of the Press,” in Marx/Engels Collected Works (New York: International Publishers, 1975) 1:132 –81;

Sigmund Freud, “Humour,” in The Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works of Sigmund Freud, trans. James Strachey (London: Hogarth, 1960), 21:166;

Sigmund Freud, Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious, in The Standard Edition, 8:5;

Lenny Bruce, How to Talk Dirty and Influence People: An Autobiography (Chicago: Playboy, 1965)

;

Slavoj Žižek, First as Tragedy, Then as Farce (New York: Verso, 2009)

Uchida Roan, “Bungei sakuhin no hatsubai kinshi mondai: ‘Yaregaki’ hatsubai kinshi ni tsuki tōrosha oyobi kōko ni tsugu” (1908), reprinted in Odagiri Hideo, ed., Hakkin sakuhinshū, 2nd ed. (Tokyo: Hokushindō, 1956), 13–25.

Uchida, “Bungei sakuhin no hatsubai,” 19.

10.

See

Judith Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (New York: Routledge, 1999), 59–68.

11.

Uchida, “Bungei sakuhin no hatsubai,” 19.

12.

Sigmund Freud, “Humour,” 166.

13.

Fujimori, “Hatsubai kinshi no mondai nit suite,” Kaizō, September, 1926, 107.

Fujimori's is the most adamantly against censorship of all the essays considered here, though even he recognizes that the abolition of censorship at the present moment would be impossible, however desirable.

14.

We would do well to recall interrogation scenes in two fictional works: Kappa and Tanizaki's “The Censor” (1921) both use interrogation scenes, one by a psychologist, the other by a censor, for ironic effect. In “The Censor,” the Tanizaki-like artist is given the initial K, while the censor (ken'etsukan) is called

T. Tosaka, Tosaka Jun zenshū, 7:483;

Rubin, Injurious to Public Morals, 242–43.

While the mixings of author-censor and censor-author refer to a mutual relationship where the author is called into being and the censor defines the identity of the state through censorship, the argument that constitutes the majority of the story posits the censor as a misinterpreter of literature. See also the film Warai no daigaku (University of laughs), dir. Hoshi Mamoru, 2004. Also worth mentioning here is that epigonen is of course a Greek word adopted by Marx, but under the influence, no doubt, of K. L. Immerman's humorous Die Epigonen.

Nii Itaru, “Hikka saiban,” Bungei shijō, November 1926, 24.

15.

Ken'etsu seido hihan, Asahi minshū kōza 13 (Tokyo: Asahi Shinbunsha, 1929)

. At the time, this was a buzzword on issues ranging from economics and politics to household organization and hygiene.

Sheldon M. Garon, Molding Japanese Minds: The State In Everyday Life (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997), 128–33, 172–74.

16.

Ōya Sōichi, “Daikan seiji toshite no ken'etsu seido,” in Ōya Sōichi zenshū (Tokyo: Sōyōsha: Hatsubai Eichōsha, 1980), 277.

Originally published February 1929 by Tokyo Asahi shinbun in the collection Shuzai ken'etsu seido hihan kōenkai.

17.

Ibid.

, 279.

18.

This is, in fact, what happened with the censorship reform movement mentioned in Rubin and Matsu'ura. See

Odagiri, Hakkin sakuhinshū, 269–93,

for a reprint of the pamphlet.

19.

Heywood Broun and George S. Chappell, eds., Nonsenseorship: Sundry Observations Concerning Prohibitions, Inhibitions and Illegalities (New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1922)

20.

Ibid.

, iii.

21.

Miki Kiyoshi, “Ken'etsu no sekinin” (1940), reprinted in Miki Kiyoshi zenshū (Tokyo: Iwanami shoten, 1968), 16:468–69.

Masamune Hakuchō similarly turns the tables on the government in an article about censorship, accusing the Ministry of Education of pirating literary works in their textbooks.

Masamune Hakuchō, “Hatsubai kinshi ni tsuite” (1924), reprinted in Masamune Hakuchō zenshū (Tokyo: Shinchōsha, 1967), 89.

22.

Karl Marx, “Comments on The Latest Prussian Censorship Instruction,” in Works of Karl Marx 1842, originally published in Anekdota zur neuesten deutshen Philosohpie und Publicistic, book 1, 1843,

available on the Marxists Internet Archive website.

23.

This common characterization is evident in

Kozakai Fuboku's essay on the psychology of the censor: Kozakai Fuboku, “Ken'etsukan no shinri,” Shimi, March 1927, reprinted in Kozakai Fuboku zenshū (Tokyo: Kaizōsha, 1930), 12:82.

24.

Shiratori Seigo, “‘Satsuriku no dendō’ to iu shi,” Kindai hikka bunkengō, special issue, Bungei shijō 2.11 (November 1926): 34.

25.

While calling for a more sensitive censor, Miki identifies the hypothetical difficulties that a change in censorial standards would entail for writers.

Miki, “Ken'etsu no sekinin,” 469.

Tachibana also discusses the unchanging nature of the standards for censorship in light of changing times and places and the personal tastes and fancies of the censor.

Tachibana, “Jo,” 8.

Ōya writes of the discrepancies in how the censor confronts texts in different venues.

Ōya, “Daikan seiji toshite,” 279.

26.

Ōya, “Daikan seiji toshite,” 277.

27.

Ibid.

, 281.

28.

Miki, “Ken'etsu no sekinin,” 468.

29.

Ibid.

, 469.

30.

Kobayashi Takiji, Kobayashi Takiji zenshū (Tokyo: Shin Nihon Shuppansha, 1982), 485.

31.

Tsuboi repeatedly uses this epithet in varying figurations.

Tsuboi Shigeji, “Bunka tōsō to ken'etsu seido ni tai suru ronsō,” Puroretaria bunka, February 1932, reprinted in Tsuboi Shigeji zenshū, ed. Tsuboi Shigeji Zenshū Henshū Iinkai, Shohan ed. (Tokyo: Seijisha, 1988), 216.

32.

See, e.g., early Shōwa issues of Yūmoa magazine for oblique jibes at the censor in cartoon form.

33.

Adachi Gen, “Puroretaria gejutsu to ero guro nansensu,” Kindai gasetsu 15 (2006): 20.

34.

For more on reform of censorship, see the pamphlet of this league opposing censorship:

Ken'etsu seidō kaisei kisei dōmei chōsa iinkai, “Wareware wa ikanaru ken'etsu seidō no shita ni sarasarete iru ka,” reprinted in Odagiri, Hakkin sakuhinshū, 269–93.

35.

Shimizu Keimokurō, “Kakaru ken'etsu seido kaisei seyo!” Kaihō, January 1928: 95.

36.

Michael Holquist, “Corrupt Originals: The Paradox of Censorship,” Literature and Censorship, special issue, PMLA 109.1 (1994): 16

37.

Sigmund Freud, Jokes and Their Relation to the Unconscious; Sigmund Freud, Three Essays on the Theory of Sexuality, in The Standard Edition, 8:5.

38.

Karatani, “Hyūmoa,” Hyūmoa toshite no yuibutsuron, Kōdansha gakujutsu bunko 1359 (Tokyo: Kōdansha, 1999), 140–41.

39.

Ōya Sōichi, “Daikan seiji toshite no ken'etsu seido,” Tokyo Asahi shinbun shuzai ken'etsu seido hihan kōenkai, February 1929, reprinted in Ōya Sōichi zenshū (Tokyo: Sōyōsha Hatsubai Eichōsha, 1980), 279,

emphasis added.

40.

Paul de Man, “Autobiography as De-Facement,” in The Rhetoric of Romanticism (New York: Columbia University Press, 1984), 77.

41.

I have adapted these terms from

Frederick Schauer, “The Ontology of Censorship,” in Censorship and Silencing: Practices of Cultural Regulation, ed. Robert C. Post, Issues & Debates Series 4 (Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute for the History of Art and the Humanities, 1998), 147–68.

42.

Here I intercede and rewrite Derrida's notion that the “concern for death … is another name for freedom.”

Jacques Derrida, The Gift of Death, trans. David Wills (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), 15.

43.

Samuel Roth, “The Censor,” in Stone Walls Do Not: The Chronicle of a Captivity (New York: William Faro, 1931), 2:187–92.

44.

Onchi Terutake [Kimura Shigeo], “Ken'etsuri ni,” in Nihon puroretaria bungaku shū (Tokyo: Shin nihon shuppansha, 1987), 28:198

. This was originally published in the February 1931 edition of Puroretaria shi.

45.

These cases are telling exceptions to the discourses from which they are wrenched. See also

Onchi Terutake, “Yume to hakkotsu to no seppun,” in Onchi Terutake shishū (Tokyo: Shin Nihon Shijinsha, 1961), 16–37.

46.

The suicides of these periodicals should be contrasted with the valiant survival in the face of censorship of the French Canard Enchaîné through World War I and beyond described in

Allen Douglas, War, Memory, and The Politics of Humor: The Canard Enchaîné and World War I (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002)

47.

John Sayer, “Art and Politics, Dissent and Repression: The Masses Magazine Versus the Government, 1917–1918,” American Journal of Legal History 32.1 (January 1988): 44.

48.

Art Young, Art Young: His Life And Times, ed. John Nicholas Beffel (New York: Sheridan House, 1939), 322.

49.

The “credo” of the magazine read, “This magazine is owned and Published Co-operatively by its

Editors.” Quoted in Sayer, “Art and Politics, Dissent and Repression,” 44.

50.

Max Eastman, “The Post Office Censorship,” The Masses, September 1917, 24.

51.

Was The Masses killed or did it commit suicide? The Masses' suicide by post reiterates Derrida's claim of postcards; “je me trie———je me tue (I sort myself/I kill myself).”

Jacques Derrida, The Post Card: From Socrates to Freud and Beyond (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1987), 16.

52.

In the masthead of each issue of Kokkei shinbun.

53.

Kokkei shinbun, August 20, 1908.

54.

“Jisatsu gō” Kokkei shinbun, October 20, 1908, 173.

55.

Thomas E. Gould, “‘A Tiny Operation with Great Effect’: Authorial Revision and Editorial Emasculation in the Manuscript of Hemingway's For Whom the Bell Tolls,” in Blowing the Bridge: Essays on Hemingway and For Whom the Bell Tolls, ed. Rena Sanderson and Robert H. Walker (New York: Greenwood, 1992), 79;

Okunari Tatsu, Okazaki Hideo, and Toneri Eiichi, eds., Fuseji bungaku jiten: XX o tanoshimu hon (Tokyo: Ōtakushinpōsha, 1977), 3–22.

56.

Beatrice Hanssen, Critique of Violence: Between Poststructuralism and Critical Theory, Warwick Studies in European Philosophy (New York: Routledge, 2000), 9;

Margaret DiCanio, The Encyclopedia of Violence: Origins, Attitudes, Consequences (New York: Facts on File, 1993)

57.

Raymond Williams, “Violence,” in Keywords (New York: Oxford University Press, 1983), 329–31.

58.

Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison, trans. Alan Sheridan (London: Allen Lane, 1977), 34.

59.

In fact, the scars may be sites of not only infamy but also desire, pleasure, nostalgia, and freedom.

Chapter 4

Tachibana Kōshiro [Takahiro], “Hikidashi no yubiwa,” Hanzai kagaku, February 1931, 179.

Ibid.

, 180.

Tachibana Kōshiro [Takahiro], Kore ijō wa kinshi: aru ken'etsu kakarichō no shuki (Tokyo: Senshinsha, 1932), 205–6.

The May 1932 edition of Hanzai kagaku (3.6) was banned for obscenity according to Shuppan keisatsu hō, 44:79.

Georges Bataille, Visions of Excess: Selected Writings, 1927–1939, trans. Allan Stoekl, Theory and History of Literature 14 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1985)

;

V. F. Calverton and Samuel Daniel Schmalhausen, Sex in Civilization (New York: Macaulay, 1929)

cited in

Tanizawa Eiichi, “Ero guro nansensu: ‘Kafe no jidai,’ Umehara Hokumei nado,” in Nihon bungaku kenkyū shiryō sōsho: Shōwa no bungaku, ed. Nihon Bungaku Kenkyū Shiryō Kankōkai (Tokyo: Yūseidō Shuppan, 1981), 74.

These were Shikijō hanzai seiyoku no shinpi; Sekiaku no zasshiō: Noma Seiji no hansei; Kami nagara no Nihon seishin; Chijō hanzai torimono hiwa; Shūmi no hōritsu ura hyō; Shibai zange; Nankai no jōnetsu; Ajia henkyō ibun; Nanpō no seikatsu kagaku; Heitai seikatsu; and Yomikiri adauchi shōsetsu shu.

Tachibana Takahiro, Kore ijō wa kinshi, 55;

F. L. Wheeler writes that the “modern generation” has “a virus in their blood—the virus of universal chaos consequent upon war; of a world of spiritual, intellectual, and economic principles in a state of flux.” F. L. Wheeler, Modernity (London: Williams & Norgate, 1929) 65.

Kōjimachi Kōji and Kita Sōichirō, eds., Modan yōgo jiten (Tokyo: Jitsugyō no Nihonsha, 1930)

. Facsimile version republished in

Kindai yōgo no jiten shūsei, vol. 13 (Tokyo: Ōzorasha, 1995)

The phrase the “period of three Ss” (san S jidai) referred to speed, sports, and screen in the early 1930s and not “sports, screen, and sex” until the postwar era when the US occupiers were said to have brought in a “3S policy” (san S seisaku). For examples of the “period of three Ss” referring to speed, sports, and screen, see “San esu jidai” (1932) and Kyōdo fūkei (1933); “San esu jidai,” Fujin kurabu 13.8 (1932) and Kyōdo fūkei (Tokyo: Kyōiku Bijutsukan Shuppanbu, 1933), 58–59. For more on the postwar “three S policy,” see

Ian Buruma, Inventing Japan, 1853–1964 (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2003), 135.

Also note that Tokayer and Swartz write about the evils of “sex, screen, sports” being the influence of Jews in Japan.

Marvin Tokayer and Mary Swartz, The Fugu Plan: The Untold Story of the Japanese and the Jews during World War II (New York: Paddington, 1979)

, 141.

10.

See, e.g., the numerous volumes of

Kōji Kōjimachi and Kita Sōichirō, eds., Modan yōgo jiten (Tōkyō-shi: Jitsugyō no Nihonsha, 1930)

, reprinted in

Kindai yōgo no jiten shūsei, vol. 13 (Tōkyō: Ōzorasha, 1995)

11.

Gertzman borrows these terms from

Max Weber. Jay A. Gertzman, Bookleggers and Smuthounds: The Trade in Erotica, 1920–1940 (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1999), 23, 28, 37–38.

12.

Tanizawa Ei'ichi, “Ero guro nansensu:

‘Kafe no jidai,’ Umehara Hokumei nado,” in Nihon bungaku kenkyū shiryō sōsho: Shōwa no bungaku, ed. Nihon Bungaku Kenkyū Shiryō Kankōkai (Tōkyō: Yūseidō Shuppan, 1981), 74.

13.

Yamaguchi Masao, ‘Zasetsu’ no Shōwa shi (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1995), 349.

See also

Mark Driscoll, Absolute Erotic, Absolute Grotesque : The Living, Dead, and Undead in Japan's Imperialism, 1895–1945 (Durham: Duke University Press, 2010), 184,

191. See also the “XX bungaku no yakata: zasshi shiryō Kamashasutora” webpage.

14.

See

“Erosu no kaitakusha: Umehara Hokumei no shigoto,” Erochika 42 (1973)

;

Jō Ichirō, Hakkinbon zoku, Fukutake bunko (Tokyo: Fukutake shoten, 1991)

; and

Umehara Masaki, “Umehara Hokumei sono ashiato,” in Dokyumento Nihonjin, ed. Muraoka Kū (Tokyo: Gakugei shorin, 1968), 6:220–41, passim

15.

Masaki, “Umehara Hokumei sono ashiato,” 226.

16.

Ibid.

, 227.

17.

Joshua Kunitz, “Albert Rhys Williams: A Biographical Sketch,” in Through the Russian Revolution (New York: Monthly Review Press, 1967), passim

18.

A. R. Williams, Roshia daikakumeishi, trans. Umehara Hokumei and Uyama Asatarō (Tokyo: Asakaya shoten, 1925)

, n.p. This was a Japanese translation of

Through the Russian Revolution, published in 1921.

19.

Umehara Hokumei, “Dankikan hishi: sayokuha ero no kaidendō kindai yōkiteki hyakkaten,” in Nichibunken Pamphlet Collection UC71Um (Tokyo: Dankikan shokyoku,1930), n.p

20.

Umehara, “Mirabō haku no chinpon” [Dr Mirabeau's rare books], Gurotesuku 1.1 (1928): 146–9;

Umehara Masaki, “Umehara Hokumei sono ashiato,” 232–37.

21.

See

Jō, Hakkinbon zoku;

Umehara Masaki, “Umehara Hokumei sono ashiato.”

22.

For more on this burgeoning discourse and its relation to the nation-state, see

Sabine Frühstück, Colonizing Sex: Sexology and Social Control in Modern Japan, Colonialisms (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003), passim

23.

He may have even published under Yoshikawa Eiji's name during this time, though this is in dispute.

Isogai Katsutarō, “Daisaku no keifu: Yoshikawa Eiji to ‘tokkyū Ajia’ Umehara Hokumei no daisaku ka,” Taishū bungaku kenkyū 4.94 (1991): passim

24.

Umehara Masaki, “Umehara Hokumei sono ashiato,” 235.

25.

Ueno Chizuko, “Ratai no ‘roshutsudo’ to sono ‘seijisei,’” in Hatsujō sōchi: erosu no shinario (Tokyo: Chikuma shōbō, 1998), 42.

26.

Umehara Masaki, “Umehara Hokumei sono ashiato,” 230.

27.

Suzuki Ryōzō, “Shinbunkishajidainokare ‘Hito wo kutta otoko’ no hyōden,” Gurotesuku, January 1930, 306.

28.

For more on the Takebashi incident, see also

Umehara Hokumei, ed., Kinsei bōdō hangaku henranshi (1931; Tokyo: Kaien shobō, 1973), 79–126.

For more detailed documentation on Hokumei's insurrectionary concerns, see also the afterword to the republished edition by

Kano Masanao, “Tenka jōran e no kitai,” passim

Kaneko Yōbun, “Umehara Hokumei to Bungei shijō,” in Bungei shijō fukkokuban bessatsu, ed. Susumu Odagiri (Tokyo: Nihon Kindai Bungakukan, 1976)

29.

Umehara Masaki, “Umehara Hokumei sono ashiato,” 232.

30.

Jō, Hakkinbon zoku, 103.

31.

Cited in Ōuchi

Tsutomu, “Eroguronansensu,” in Fashizumu e no michi (Tokyo: Chuō kōronsha, 1967), 458.

32.

See

Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, “Can the Subaltern Speak?” in Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture, ed. Cary Nelson and Lawrence Grossberg (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1988), 271–318.

33.

Hirano Ken, “Seiji to bungaku” (1946), reprinted in Hirano Ken zenshū (Tōkyō: Shinchōsha, 1975), 1:115–21, passim

;

Ara Masahito, “Bungakuteki ningenzō,” Kindai bungaku, March 1946;

Odagiri Hideo, Shakai bungaku, shakaishugi bungaku kenkyū (Tōkyō: Keisō shobō, 1990), 4168–75,

passim. G. T. Shea, Leftwing Literature in Japan (Tokyo: Hosei University Press, 1964), 328–37.

34.

Aramata Hiroshi, Puroretaria bungaku wa monosugoi (Tokyo: Heibonsha, 2000), passim

. See also

Shimamura Teru, “Ero, guro, nansensu,” in Korekushon modan toshi bunka: 15 Ero guro nansensu, ed. Shimamura Teru (Tokyo: Yumani shobō, 2005), 627–36;

Adachi Gen, “Puroretaria geijutsu to ero guro nansensu,” Kindai gasetsu, 2006, 15.

35.

Gertzman, Bookleggers and Smuthounds, 23.

36.

Or as

Barbara Foley claims more simply, “the literary proletarians were part of modernism.” Barbara Foley, Radical Representations: Politics and Form in U.S. Proletarian Fiction, 1929–1941, Post-Contemporary Interventions (Durham: Duke University Press, 1993)

. See also

Miriam Silverberg, Erotic, Grotesque, Nonsense: the Mass Culture of Japanese Modern Times (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2006), passim

37.

This chapter was reprinted as

Hokumei, “Kagiana no shibai kenbutsu,” Bungei shijō 2.7 (1926)

;

Umehara Hokumei, Satsujin gaisha: Akumashugi zensei jidai (Tokyo: Akane shobō, 1924), 272.

, 309.

, 310.

, 315.

Jō, Hakkinbon zoku, 108.

42.

Yamaguchi, ‘Zasetsu’ no Shōwa shi, passim

. Driscoll also employs the rhetoric of an outside.

43.

Umehara Hokumei, “Ichiyazuke no kakumeiyasan,” Bungei shijō 3.1 (January 1926): 46.

44.

Azuma Tairiku [Umehara Hokumei], “Shōrei to sekkō hei,” in Aikoku buyū tantei kaiki jitsuwa kessaku shū, Shinnengō furoku, special issue, Kōdan kurabu, January 1939, 88–111.

45.

Quoted in

ibid.

, 88, emphasis added.

46.

Ibid.

, 88.

47.

Gershon Legman, Love and Death: A Study in Censorship (New York: Breaking Point, 1949), 19.

48.

Attributed to Gershon Legman in Mikita

Brottman, Funny Peculiar: Gershon Legman and the Psychopathology of Humor (London: Routledge, 2004)

49.

Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality, vol.1, An Introduction (New York: Vintage, 1978), 157.

50.

Yano, Kan'ichi “Sayoku bungaku kara sensō bungaku e,” in Kindai sensō bungaku jiten, Izumi jiten shiriizu 3 (Osaka: Izumi Shoin, 1996), 1:292–93.

51.

By my count, fewer than ten such books exist in the archives of the Home Ministry censors.

52.

Sari Kawana, Murder Most Modern: Detective Fiction and Japanese Culture (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 2008), 148–70.

53.

Ueno Chizuko, Nationalism and Gender, trans. Beverley Anne Yamamoto, Japanese Society Series (Melbourne: Trans Pacific, 2004), 161.

54.

The banning on both grounds of sedition and obscenity of the humorous comic book Heitai seikatsu (1944) with its satirical vision of the life of soldiers in training, including jibes at their sexual jaunts, is an example of how these two categories could be conflated in times of war.

55.

Ernst Friedrich, WAR against WAR! (Seattle: Real Comet Press, 1987), 233

. This book was published originally as Krieg dem Krieg.

56.

I was pleased to find this connection confirmed in Kanno Satomi's recent work on the age of “perversion.” Though my original research on the subject, presented at Mid-Atlantic Regional Association of Asian Studies Conference in October 2004, did not benefit from Kanno's insight, I have since found corroboration in her linking depictions of violence to the “perverse” spirit of the mid-1920s. See

Kanno Satomi, ‘Hentai’ no jidai, Kōdansha gendai shinsho 1815 (Tokyo: Kōdansha, 2005), esp. 157–63.

57.

Hokumei's antiwar views can be read in his preface to his wartime translation of Otto Paust's Volk im Feu, in which he warns that postwar Japan might become what Germany became after World War I. See the Japanese translation:

Otto Paust, Hi no naka no kokumin (Tokyo: Shōbunkaku, 1943), 1–4.

58.

Nihon Sayoku Bungeika Sōrengō, ed., Sensō ni tai suru sensō: Anchi miritarizumu shōsetsu shū (1928; Tokyo: Fuji shuppan, 1984)

59.

Yano Kan'ichi argues that war narrative derived its penchant for realistic detail and conveyance of the facts “as they really are” (aru ga mama) or “direct records of experience” (chokusetsu no keiken no ki) from leftist literature. Yano K

an'ichi, “Sayoku bungaku kara sensō bungaku e,” in Kindai sensō bungaku jiten, Izumi jiten shiriizu 3 (Osaka: Izumi Shoin, 1996) 1:292–93.

In this regard, also note that the examination copy of one of the rare books to have been banned both for reasons of morals (fūzoku) and sedition (annei), Secret Stories of Blind Love, Crime, and Arrest (Chijō hanzai torimono hiwa), has pencil markings of the censor around several passages relating to war. Sections dealing with war are titled “Out of War Great Murderers Arise,” “The Ravages of War: Powerless Antiwar Treaties,” and the like.

Chijō hanzai torimono hiwa (Osaka: Yūbunkan, 1939), 19, 203, and 430.

The call number of the examination copy is NDL

501–503.

60.

Edward Said, Culture and Imperialism (New York: Vintage, 1994), 14.

Chapter 5

Samuel Weber, “Wartime,” in Violence, Identity, and Self-Determination, ed. Hent de Vries and Samuel Weber (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997), 91.

Nishitani Osamu, “Sekai sensō,” in Sensōron, Kōdansha gakujutsu bunko 1342 (Tokyo: Kōdansha, 2001), 17.

Here I am drawing on J. M. Coetzee's important observation that “undesirable” is not that which cannot be desired, but that which ought not to be desired.

J. M. Coetzee, Giving Offense: Essays on Censorship (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1996), viii

. The term administration here is meant to refer both to Richard Burt's terminology in The Administration of Aesthetics, which stems from Adorno, and to the Japanese word gyōsei (

), which can mean strictly governance, but is also used in conjunction with the arts to refer to the ways in which large institutions (corporate, government, and otherwise) influence the production of art.

Richard Burt, “Introduction: The ‘New’ Censorship,” in The Administration of Aesthetics: Censorship, Political Criticism, and the Public Sphere, ed. Richard Burt (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1994)

What seems important to recall is that despite the temporality of Althusser's story of an empowered individual (the police) calling out to an under-privileged individual (a citizen), the there is an always-already simultaneity in hailing, an unceasing process. See Louis

Althusser, “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses: Notes Towards an Investigation,” in Mapping Ideology, ed. Slavoj Žižek (New York: Verso, 1994), 110–11, 131–32

. Perhaps the most straightforward example of this plurilocal phenomenon has been called the “Banned in Boston Principle,” which is where a book that is banned in Boston is instantly transformed into a best seller everywhere else.

Edward Thomas Mack, Manufacturing Modern Japanese Literature: Publishing, Prizes, and the Ascription of Literary Value, Asia-Pacific: Culture, Politics, and Society (Durham: Duke University Press, 2010)

See

John Guillory, “The Ordeal of Middlebrow Culture,” Transition 67 (1995): 82–92.

10.2307/2935258

See

Komori Yōichi, “Kindai Nihon bungaku to ōdeiensu,” in Karuchuraru stadeizu to no taiwa (Tokyo: Shinyōsha, 1996), passim

This was compiled by comparing the list of novelists serialized in the

Asahi newspapers in Chiezō 2000 bessatsu furoku: Asahi Shinbun rensai shōsetsu no 120 nen [Tokyo: Asahi Shinbunsha, 2000]

with the list of extant censor's examination copies in the NDL and LOC collection, the index in Hakkinbon III, and Odagiri Hideo and Fukuoka Seikichi,

Shōwa shoseki zasshi shinbun hakkin nenpyō, Zōhōban ed. [Kawasaki-shi: Meiji Bunken Shiryō Kankōkai, 1981]

This was compiled by comparing the list of novelists serialized in the

Asahi newspapers in Chiezō 2000 bessatsu furoku: Asahi Shinbun rensai shōsetsu no 120 nen [Tokyo: Asahi Shinbunsha, 2000]

with the list of extant censor's examination copies in the NDL and LOC collection, the index in Hakkinbon III, and Odagiri Hideo and Fukuoka Seikichi,

Shōwa shoseki zasshi shinbun hakkin nenpyō, Zōhōban ed. [Kawasaki-shi: Meiji Bunken Shiryō Kankōkai, 1981]

Though the novel was to have been published after the consultation system officially ended in 1927, it appears from the presence of two examination copies that the publishers had been in consultation with the Home Ministry censors, or at least that they resubmitted the second, X'ed copy in the hopes that it might pass.

10.

The two at the NDL are held as

500–105. The Prange Collection copy has been thoroughly studied by Yokote. Though I have not had a chance to review the actual text, Yokote provides a line-by-line commentary and transcription version in his

Hi senryōka no bungaku ni kansuru kisoteki kenkyū: ronkō hen (Tokyo: Musashino Shobō, 1996), 209–42.

11.

See

Monica Braw, The Atomic Bomb Suppressed: American Censorship in Occupied Japan (Armonk, N.Y.: M. E. Sharpe, 1991), 63–64.

12.

Kuroshima Denji, A Flock of Swirling Crows and Other Proletarian Writings, trans. Zeljko Cipris (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2005), 168;

Kuroshima Denji, Kuroshima Denji zenshū (Tokyo: Chikuma Shobō, 1970), 3:34.

13.

Kuroshima, A Flock, 142;

Kuroshima, Kuroshima, 9–10.

14.

Kuroshima, A Flock, 153;

Kuroshima, Kuroshima, 20.

15.

Kuroshima, A Flock, 150;

Kuroshima, Kuroshima, 17.

16.

Kurihara Sadako, Black Eggs: Poems, ed. and trans. Richard H. Minear, Michigan Monograph Series in Japanese Studies 12 (Ann Arbor: Center for Japanese Studies University of Michigan, 1994)

17.

See, e.g.,

Jin Itakura, Jū toru hima ni (Chiba: Takitsubo, 1939)

, which was banned for relating the homosexual experiences between two soldiers.

18.

See the Kōdansha's Nihon gendai bungaku zenshū (vol. 73). The novel was subsequently included in the Chikuma shobō Gendai Nihon bungaku taikei (vol. 56) in 1971, the Chikuma gendai bungaku taikei (vol. 38) in 1978, and the Nihon puroretaria bungaku shū (vol. 9) in 1984. And if we needed further corroboration of its delayed canonization, the year 2005 has seen the publication of its translation into English, one guarantor of canonicity or at least of changing attitudes in the land of the censor. Gathered from a search of

Gendai nihon bungaku zenshū sōran (Tokyo: Nichigai Asoshieetsu, 1999), CD-ROM

19.

Donald Keene, Dawn to the West: Japanese Literature in the Modern Era, Fiction (New York: Holt, 1984), 967.

20.

Masao Miyoshi, Off Center: Power and Culture Relations between Japan and the United States (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1991)

;

Edward Seidensticker, “Tanizaki Junichiro, 1886–1965,” Monumenta Nipponica: Studies in Japanese Culture 21.3–4 (1966)

;

Van C. Gessel, “Infatuation with Modernity: Junichiro Tanizaki,” in Three Modern Novelists: Soseki, Tanizaki, Kawabata (New York: Kodansha 1993)

;

Gwenn Boardman Petersen, The Moon in the Water: Understanding Tanizaki, Kawabata, and Mishima (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1979)

;

Keene, Dawn to the West; Ken Ito, Visions of Desire: Tanizaki's Fictional Worlds (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991)

;

Itō Sei, Sakkaron (Tokyo: Chikuma Shobō, 1961)

;

Noguchi Takehiko, “Kokyō toshite ikyō: Kansai ijū to ‘koten kaiki’ o megutte,” in Nihon no sakka: Tanizaki Jun'ichirō, vol. 8 (Tokyo: Shogakkan, 1991)

21.

See

Andō Hiroshi, “‘Ippan katteinin ni tai shi aku eikyō’: Dazai Osamu Hanabi,” Hakkin Kindai bungakushi, special issue, Kokubungaku 47.9 (July 2002): 106–10;

Inose describes how, unable to publish in magazines, Mishima used his family connections to secure paper to privately publish some of his early wartime writings.

Inose Naoki, Perusona: Mishima Yukio den (Tokyo: Bungei Shunjū, 1995)

22.

Jay Rubin, Injurious to Public Morals: Writers and the Meiji State (Seattle: Washington University Press, 1984)

;

Ken Ito, Visions of Desire: Tanizaki's Fictional Worlds (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991), 186, 190;

Tanizaki Jun'ichirō, Tanizaki Jun'ichirō zenshū (Tokyo: Chūō kōronsha, 1968), 23:7,

hereafter abbreviated as TJZ;

Donald Keene, Landscapes and Portraits: Appreciations of Japanese Culture (Palo Alto: Kodansha International, 1971), 313.

23.

Rubin, Injurious to Public Morals, 138–39.

Ito, Visions of Desire, 186, 190.

24.

TJZ, 16:293.

25.

Image reproduced from TJZ.

26.

Honor Tracy, Kakemono: A Sketch Book of Post-war Japan (New York: Coward-McCann, 1950), 140.

This is also discussed and translated into Japanese in

Matsuura Sōzō, Senryōka no genron dan'atsu (Tokyo: Gendai Jānarizumu Shuppankai, 1969), 131.

See also

Marlene Mayo, “Civil Censorship in Occupied Japan,” in Legacies and Ambiguities: Postwar Fiction and Culture in West Germany and Japan (Washington: The Woodrow Wilson Center Press, 1996), 143.

27.

Yoshiko Yokochi Samuel speaks of the word being excised from textbooks. See

Yoshiko Yokochi Samuel's comments in “Panel Discussion: literature and the arts,” in The Occupation of Japan: Arts and Culture, The Proceedings of the Sixth Symposium sponsored by the MacArthur Memorial, October 18–19, 1984, ed. Thomas Burkman (Norfolk: General Douglas MacArthur Foundation, 1988), 241.

28.

TJZ, 17:12.

29.

TJZ, 16:286.

30.

Odagiri and Fukuoka,

Shōwa shoseki, zasshi, shinbun hakkin nenpyō, 3:1009;

Nichigai Asoshiētsu, ed., Nihon choshamei sōmokuroku 27/44 (Tokyo: Nichigai Asoshiētsu, 1990), 476.

31.

Elaine Scarry, “Injury and the Structure of War,” Representations 10 (1985): 1.

10.1525/rep.1985.10.1.99p0402z

32.

Ibid.

10.1525/rep.1985.10.1.99p0402z

, 1–55, passim.

33.

Etō Jun, Ochiba hakiyose, reprinted in 1946 nen kenpō: Sono kōsoku, sono hoka, Bunshun bunko (Tokyo: Bungei shunjū, 1995), 354.

34.

Etō Jun, “Amerika ha nihon de no ken'etsu o ika ni junbi shite ita ka,” in Tozasareta genron kūkan: Senryōgun no ken'etsu to sengo nihon, Bunshun bunko E28 (Tokyo: Bungei shunjū, 1998).

35.

Komori Yōichi, “Yuragi” no Nihon bungaku (Tokyo: Nihon hōsō shuppan kyōkai, 1998), 279–80.

36.

This marked passage is taken from a quotation from Jō Ichirō's discussion of the editorially suppressed portions of the book in

Jō Ichirō, Hakkinbon (Tokyo: Fukutake Shoten, 1991), 87.

My original research on this topic was done before the publication of Haruko Taya Cook's in depth study, which draws from the wartime version held at the National Diet Library in

Haruko Taya Cook, “The Many Lives of Living Soldiers: Ishikawa Tatsuzō and Japan's War in Asia,” in War, Occupation, and Creativity: Japan and East Asia, ed. Marlene Mayo and Thomas Rhimer (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2001), 149–75.

This translation is modified from Cipris, who translates a postwar edition without reference to the Xs and textual particularities of wartime editions:

Zeljko Cipris, “Radiant Carnage: Japanese Writers on the War Against China” (Ph.D diss., Columbia University, 1994), 293.

His published translation also omits mention of the fuseji. Tatsuzō

Ishikawa, Soldiers Alive, trans. Zeljko Cipris (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2003), passim

. All quotations were also checked against the postwar Shōwa bungaku zenshū (1988), which does not acknowledge passages that received fuseji, and the Chūkō bunko version from 1999, which marks where the wartime deletions were with sidebar emphasis marks.

Ishikawa, Tatsuzō, “Ikiteiru heitai,” in Shōwa bungaku zenshū, vol. 36 (Tokyo: Shōgakkan, 1986)

;

Ishikawa Tatsuzō, Ikiteiru heitai (Tokyo: Chūo Kōronsha, 1999)

37.

As quoted in

Suzuki Masao, “Mugi to heitai to Ikiteiru heitai no Chūgoku ni okeru hankyō ni kan suru oboegaki,” Yokohama shiritsu daigaku ronsō 50.2 (1999): 14.

38.

See

ibid.

, 12. Translation itself may signal canonization. See

Walter Benjamin, Illuminations (New York: Schocken, 1969), 73, 75.

39.

Translation modified from Cipris, 262;

Shōwa, 651;

and

Chūkō bunko, 47.

40.

Barley and Soldiers led to Earth and Soldiers (Tsuchi to heitai) (apparently written earlier than Barley and Soldiers), Chocolate and Soldiers (Chokoretto to heitai), Flowers and Soldiers (Hana to heitai), and “Cigarettes and Soldiers” (“Tabako to heitai”). For a description of the degree to which Hino's work penetrated wartime Japanese cultural production, see

David Martin Rosenfeld, “Unhappy Soldier: Hino Ashihei and Japanese World War Two Literature” (Ph.D diss., University of Michigan, 1999)

;

David M. Rosenfeld, Unhappy Soldier: Hino Ashihei and Japanese World War II Literature, Studies of Modern Japan (Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books, 2002)

. Also note that, though Rosenfeld identifies the “unhappy soldier” as Hino's major trope, he does not acknowledge that this trope itself was both canonical and censored. See particularly the following censored poem “Claws” (Tsume;

) of Hino's poem collection “Blue Fox” (Aogitsune;

), published in 1943.

Upon Soldiers, Soldiers despair!
All day long, through violent attack they rule.
Upon Spring, Soldiers do despair,
timelessly Flowers bloom; taste the Fragrance of Flowers only from a distance!
Upon Night, Soldiers do despair,
in Dreams visages spied, despised guns.
Upon the Moon, Soldiers do despair,
'tis true, and now only guns have your Fragrance.
Upon Soldiers, Soldiers do despair.
No you, No Flowers, now even Dreams are finite enemies.

Poem quoted in

Jō Ichirō, Hakkinbon (Tokyo: Fukutake shoten, 1991), 1:120.

See also

Akiyama Kiyoshi, Hakkin shi shū (Tokyo: Chōbunsha, 1970), 251–53;

Hino Ashihei, Aogitsune [Seiko]: shi shū (Tokyo: Rokukō Shōkai, 1943)

: pages are 111–16 removed from extant copies.

41.

Translation modified from Rosenfeld, “Unhappy Soldier,” 113. See also Takasaki Ryūji's reflection on this scene in comparison with the cruelties of Ishikawa's text. Takasaki observes that Hino and Ishikawa have more in common than Ishikawa and the prewar proletariat literati. In the end he sees Ishikawa's novel as “war affirming.”

Takasaki Ryūji, Sensō to sensō bungaku to (Tokyo: Nihon Tosho Sentâ, 1986), 72–74.

This notion seems to have an origin in Ara Masahito's claim that Ishikawa's work was neither antiwar nor “opportunist literature,” but “literature of resistance.”

Ara Masahito, “Kaisetsu,” in Nihon no bungaku, Iwanami gendai bunko (Tokyo: Chūo Kōronsha, 1966), 56:494,

emphasis added. My point here is that even the censored is not necessarily anticanonical.

42.

Rosenfeld, “Unhappy Soldier,” 94;

Shōwa, 712

(translation modified).

43.

Rosenfeld, “Unhappy Soldier,” 43;

Shōwa, 719 (translation modified, emphasis added)

44.

Jay Rubin, Injurious to Public Morals, 30.

45.

Ishikawa Tatsuzō, Nihon no bungaku, 146.

Cf. the canonical Into the Valley by John Hersey, which begins with this disclaimer: “The characters of this book all are or were real men, and any resemblance to characters of fiction is purely coincidental.”

John Hersey, Into the Valley: A Skirmish of the Marines (New York: Knopf, 1944), 4.

46.

Trial remark cited in

Yasunaga Taketo, Kokubungaku kaishaku to kanshō 41.10 (1976): 38.

47.

Hino Ashihei, “Mugi to heitai: Maegaki,” Kaizō, August 1938, 104.

48.

Ibid.

, 105.

49.

Rosenfeld, “Unhappy Soldier,” 27–52.

50.

Here I am considering only the first short story published in the February 1948 issue of Bungakukai, a portion of which would later be included in the full-length novel of the same name.

51.

Ōoka Shōhei, “Furyoki,” Manuscript 51686(003) held at the Kanagawaken Kindai Bungakkan, page 57.

Used with the kind permission of Ōoka Harue. Hereafter abbreviated as “Furyoki” MS.

52.

Keiko McDonald, “Ooka's Examination of the Self in A POWs Memoirs,” Journal of the Association of Teachers of Japanese 21.1 (April 1987): 20–24.

53.

Ōoka Shōhei, “Furyoki,” Bungakukai, February 1948, 15.

, 17.

, 18.

Ōoka, “Furyoki” MS;

Ōoka, “Furyoki,” Bungakukai, 20.

The 〈 〉 marks signify portions Ōoka added later and marked for insertion into the sentence with an arrow. The question marks in the translation are meant to show an attempt to translate partially legible words in the Japanese. The bracketed-off portion of text above was perhaps a marginal afterthought inserted into the body of the text with an arrow in the manuscript version.

57.

Ōoka, “Furyoki” MS.

58.

Ōoka, “Furyoki,” Bungakukai, 17.

59.

Ibid.

, 20.

60.

Ōoka Shōhei, “San Jose yasen byōin,” Chūō kōron 63.4 (April 1948): 47–55.

Censorship report reproduced in

Hisenryōka no bungaku ni kan suru kisoteki kenkyū: shiryō hen, ed. Yokote Kazuhiko (Tokyo: Musashino shobō, 1995), 37–38.

61.

James A. Michener Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Box I93, Folder 6, page 306.

62.

It is probably not insignificant that Granville Hicks, the reformed socialist critic, was the one exception among the readers. Hicks thought the story contained the “heart” of the collection.

James A. Michener, Voice of Asia (New York: Random House, 1951), 5.

63.

Ibid.

, 4.

64.

James A. Michener Papers, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Box I93, Folder 6, page 306.

65.

Michener, Voice of Asia, 3–12.

66.

Michener Papers, Box I93, Folder 6, page 307.

67.

Michener, Tales of the South Pacific (New York: Macmillan, 1947), 233.

See Catch-22 for another humorous look at the haphazardness of the mail censor.

Joseph Heller, Catch-22 (1955; New York: Scribner, 1989), 16.

68.

Edward Said, Culture and Imperialism (New York: Vintage, 1994), 96.

69.

Ibid.

, 4. Said's own stated preference for the dominant Western canon should be recalled.

70.

Ibid.

, 19.

Chapter 6

Of course, the above (non-)passage could be taken to represent other literary blanks due to natural deaths, earthquakes that consume books in flames, or even the more mundane writer's block. In a pathbreaking passage in Interpretation of Dreams, Freud discusses censorship in terms of the blocking of major roadways by “natural” disasters (“floods, for instance”), thereby displacing possible other conceptions of censorship arising from more “artificial” disasters also resulting in the blocking of roads (wars, for example). The connections between “acts of god” and the ungodly violence of human censors both of which may destroy lives and the lives of texts are then perhaps not so superficial, though the maintenance of their difference is essential. See

Sigmund Freud, Interpretation of Dreams, trans. James Strachey (New York: Avon, 1998), 569.

Miyatake Gaikotsu henshū ehagaki ruibetsu daishūsei, Tōkyō Daigaku Meiji Shinbun Zasshi Bunko (Tōkyō: Keiyōsha, 2000), CD-ROM.

Jay Rubin, Injurious to Public Morals: Writers and the Meiji State (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1984), 10, 28, 246–47.

The X may be considered a suture on the flesh that is neither spiritual nor material, according to Maurice Merleau-Ponty. Although some have gone so far as to consider Xs like “scabies” that need to be scratched and solved, the metaphor of a suture which also may itch seems more apropos of a sign that stitches meaning and closes off textual insides from other possible outsides. See

Maurice Merleau-Ponty, “The Intertwining—The Chiasm,” in The Visible and the Invisible, ed. Claude Lefort, trans. Alphonso Lingis (Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University Press, 1968), 139;

Okunari Tatsu, Okazaki Hideo, and Toneri Eiichi, eds., Fuseji bungaku jiten: XX o tanoshimu hon (Tokyo: Ōtakushinpōsha, 1977), 3–22.

See points de capiton in

Jacques Lacan, “The Subversion of the Subject and the Dialectic of Desire in the Freudian Unconscious,” in Ecrits: A Selection, trans. Bruce Fink (New York: W. W. Norton, 2002), 291.

D. H. McKenzie, Making Meaning: “Printers of the Mind,” and other Essays (Boston: University of Massachusetts Press, 2002), 223.

See

Lev Loseff, On the Beneficence of Censorship: Aesopian Language in Modern Russian Literature, trans. Jane Bobko, Arbeiten und Texte zur Slavistik 31 (München: Verlag Otto Sagner in Kommission, 1984)

Rubin, Injurious to Public Morals

. See also the

Kanda Zatsugaku Daigaku webpage “Senzen Naimushō ni okeru shuppan ken'etsu,”

part 2.

Rubin, Injurious to Public Morals, 30.

Later revisions to the legal regulation required more time to enforce. The revisions to the publishing laws that accompanied the National Mobilization Law of 1936 widened the responsibility of publication from publishers and authors alone to include printers as well. In addition, the actual punishments were increased to up to three years in prison and fines of 300 yen.

Kanaya Hirotaka, Fuseji, ken'etsu, naietsu (Tokyo: n.p., 1976), passim (manuscript available from the National Diet Library special collections, number W461–3)

; see also

Rubin, Injurious to Public Morals, 28;

Matsu'ura Sōzō, Senryōka no genron dan'atsu (Tokyo: Gendai Jaanarizumu Shuppankai, 1969), 40–72;

Matsu'ura Sōzō, Senchū senryōka no masukomi, Matsu'ura Sōzō no shigoto (Tokyo: Ōtsuki Shoten, 1984), 2:200–6;

Hatanaka Shigeo, Oboegaki Shōwa shuppan dan'atsu shōshi (Tokyo: Tosho Shinbunsha, 1965), 171–86.

10.

Kanaya, Fuseji, ken'etsu, naietsu, passim

11.

Matsu'ura, Senryōka no genron dan'atsu, 41;

Matsu'ura, Senchū senryōka no masukomi, 28–31.

12.

The meeting of Keishichō heads in 1936 is also referred to in the timeline in Kindai Nihon Bungaku Daijiten. Thereafter, fuseji are found less and less in print, according to

Matsu'ura. Matsu'ura, Senryōka no genron dan'atsu, 40;

Tokkō keisatsu kankei shiryō shūsei 38 (September 1936) (Tokkō gaiji keisatsu jimu uchiaikai, Kokkai kōbunshokan, Tanemura shi keisatsu sankō shiryō, record code A05020194400), 49:469–71.

13.

Etō Jun, “The Sealed Linguistic Space: The Occupation Censorship and Post-War Japan, Part I,” ed. and trans. Jay Rubin, in Hikaku bunka zasshi: Annual of Comparative Culture 2 (1984): 11.

Chapter 7

Kawabata Yasunari, “Shiroi asa no kagami,” Kaizō 17.1 (January 1935), reprinted in Kawabata Yasunari zenshū (Tokyo: Shinchōsha, 1999), 24:98–100.

Translation modified from

Kawabata Yasunari, Snow Country, trans. Edward Seidensticker (New York: Knopf, 1957), 37.

Kawabata Yasunari, Yukiguni (Tokyo: Sōgensha, 1948), 41–42,

reprinted in Kawabata Yasunari zenshū, 10:33–34. Translation modified from Kawabata, Snow Country, 37.

Ōya Sōichi, “Daikan seiji toshite no ken'etsu seido,” in Ōya Sōichi zenshū, February 1929, reprinted in Tokyo Asahi shinbun shuzai ken'etsu seido hihan kōenkai (Tōkyō: Sōyōsha Hatsubai Eichōsha, 1980), 279.

This idea is repeated in the May 1929 issue of Shinchō by Nakamura Murao, who claimed that Kaizō was the cause of Kaneko Yobun's “Akai Mizumi” (The red lake) receiving so many fuseji.

Kōno Kensuke mentions the case of this journal as being a true turning point for the censorship of literature as opposed to nonfiction.

Kōno Kensuke, Kenetsu to bungaku (Tokyo: Kawade Shobō, 2009)

Kōno Kensuke gives a complete analysis of the version rife with fuseji.

Kōno Kensuke, “Nakazato Kaizan ‘Yumedono’ to kiritori sakujo,” in Kenetsu to bungaku: 1920 nendai no kōbō (Tokyo: Kawade bukkusu, 2009), 174–205.

Another history could be written using the Yale University copy, which has an intact version of the text lacking fuseji. The Yale copy of the September 1927 Kaizō comes from Naimusho keihokyoku collection.

Kōno Kensuke has taken a similar approach in his recent Kenetsu to bungaku. My idea for using Kaizō came from re-examination of an early chapter during discussion with Jay Rubin, James Dorsey, Melissa Wender, Karen Thornber, and Kirsten Cather held at Harvard's Reischauer Institute in May 2009.

Kōno Toshiro, Shōji Hidaka, and Sendai Magokoro, ed., “Kaizō” jikihitsu genkō no kenkyū: Yamamoto Sanehiko kyūzō sendai magokoro bungakukan shozō, (Tōkyō: Yūshōdō Shuppan, 2007)

Latter day estimates of print runs figure that the journal began with a circulation at 10,000 and ranged to as high as 100,000.

Seki Chūka, Zasshi kaizō no yonjūnen: fu kaizō mokuji sōran (Tokyo: Kōwadō, 1977)

See

Kōno, Kenetsu to bungaku, 14–15,

on free press.

10.

According to the chronology of banned books compiled by

Fukuoka Seikichi, Chūō kōron was banned only once in the four years between 1932 and 1935,

a period when Kaizō incurred over five bans.

Odagiri Hideo and Fukuoka Seikichi, ed., Shōwa shoseki, zasshi, shinbun hakkin nenpyō, 4 vols. (Tokyo: Meiji Bunken, 1965)

11.

According to Yokote Kazuhiko's list, Kuwabara Takeo's piece was cited as referring to censorship in the February 1948 edition.

Yokote Kazuhiko, Hisenryōka no bungaku ni kansuru kisoteki kenkyū, 2 vols. (Tokyo: Musashino Shobō, 1995)

12.

Hayashi Fusao, “Meijin meidai mandankai: fuseji mondai ni tsuite,” Shinchō 26.5 (June 1929): 134.

13.

Listed in

Shuppan keisatsu hō, vol.14 (Naimushō keihokyoku, 1929)

. See also

Kinshi shuppanbutsu mokuroku, October 18, 1929, 111.

Okudaira cites this passage, but refers to the magazine as Numei jidai, Oct. 1929.

Okudaira Yasuhiro, Political Censorship in Japan from 1931 to 1945 (Philadelphia: Institute of Legal Research, Law School, University of Pennsylvania, 1962), 68–69.

Typo repeated in

Richard H. Mitchell, Censorship in Imperial Japan (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1983)

14.

Shuppan keisatsu gaikan (Naimushō keihokyoku, January 1930)

, record number G1197, 237. See also Jay Rubin research materials, “censorship (Meiji period-pre-war),” notes by then Research Assistant Richard Torrance held in Box 1 at Harvard-Yenching.

15.

Recently, the literary scholar Kōno Kensuke has called Kaizō's overuse of redaction an “excessive self-defense measure” (kajō bōei), but claims the high point of fuseji began with the coverage of the Great Kantō Earthquake in 1923. Kōno further argues that this was mainly true for nonfiction articles and that it was not until Fujimori's “Gisei” of 1926 that literature was deeply impacted by fuseji.

Kōno Kensuke, Kenetsu to bungaku, 67.

What historical anecdotes provide for a later time (1929 and 1930) and the more recent observations by Kōno anticipate (by associating it with the earthquake) is a sense of what the pages of Kaizō were giving to their readers of both nonfiction and fiction after 1926, a profusion of fuseji. Quantitative historical material available even to readers and censors at the time suggests that the real turn followed the dissolution of the consultation system in 1927.

16.

I counted fuseji, limiting my counts to years deemed important by other historical data such as the records of the secret meeting in 1936. Other years were 1943, 1938, 1931, 1923, and 1919. But even the method of counting fuseji, for determining what should qualify as fuseji, must always be held with some skepticism. For the project of counting, and for the sake of simplicity, I chose to count Xs, along with blank spaces, Os, emphasis marks, and ellipses regardless of their semantic values.

17.

The manuscripts of Ōoka Shōhei's Furyoki may provide one example of this sort of change. Ōoka Shōhei, “Furyoki,” Manuscript 51686(003) held at the

Kanagawa-ken Kindai Bungakkan, page 57.

Used with the kind permission of Ōoka Harue.

18.

Like collected works, in D. H. McKenzie's view, magazines have the benefit of destabilizing unifying concepts of intention with the presence of physical elements.

D. F. McKenzie, Making Meaning: “Printers of the Mind,” and other Essays (Boston: University of Massachussets, 2002), 209–10.

19.

This sort of fuseji is particularly well seen in the entry for May 8 in the novel's diary. The symbol ○○ replaces place and division names.

Kaizō, August 1938, 123.

20.

An article in the Yomiuri conjectured that the play was banned not only due to offenses of obscenity and sedition but for “marring the prestige of the police.” “Jōen o kinjirareta, ‘Aru keisatsushochō no shi’”

Yomiuri shinbun, August 28, 1925, 5.

21.

Kurata Hyakuzō, “Aru keisatsushochō no shi,” Kaizō, September 1925, 62.

22.

Though highly unlikely, it is certainly possible that the XX here would not be referring to a proper name of an incident. Kōno Kensuke proposes the term conspiratorial plot (inbō jiken) in his mention of the play, probably because the word conspiracy (inbō) is used elsewhere in the play. But it would be odd if the term was printed in one part of the play and received fuseji in another. So it is more likely that possible candidates for filling in the fuseji here would be proper nouns naming a particular incident, since in the overwhelming majority of instances of a two character combination and jiken in the dictionary of record (the Kōjien, 6th ed.), the two character combinations preceding jiken are proper nouns. A similar example of a youthful flirtation with communist tendencies appears in Nogami Yaeko's “Machiko” published in the August 1928 edition of the magazine. In that story a character is referred to as the “friend from the xx incident.” See

Nogami Yaeko, “Machiko,” Kaizō, August 1928, 8, 28.

Kōno, Kenetsu to bungaku, 88.

23.

Kurata Hyakuzō, “Aru keisatsushochō no shi,” Kaizō, September 1925, 64–65.

24.

Akutagawa Ryūnosuke, “Kappa,” Kaizō March, 1927, 1.

25.

Roland Barthes, The Rustle of Language, trans. Richard Howard (New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux, 1986), 141–48.

26.

Hattori Tetsuya and Fukawa Junko, ed., Gendai no baiburu: Akutagawa Ryūnosuke “Kappa” chūkai, Kenkyūkai, Seikei daigaku (Tokyo: Bensei shuppan, 2007)

27.

Here, I have elected to quote from the nonstandard “original” rather than the canonically collected version of the text available in the zenshū and various translated editions.

Akutagawa Ryūnosuke, “Kappa,” Kaizō, March 1927, digitized from reprint in Kappa: Aru ahō no isshō (Tokyo: Ōbunsha, 1984)

, available at Aozora bunko website. See also

Akutagawa Ryūnosuke, “Kappa,” in Akutagawa Ryūnosuke zenshū (Tokyo: Iwanami, 1978), 8:325.

28.

The word of course may also be a joke on the ducklike physique of some modern renditions of the mythical Kappa.

29.

Seikei Daigaku and Kindai bungaku kenkyūkai, eds., Gendai no baiburu: Akutagawa Ryūnosuke “Kappa” Chūkai (Tokyo: Bensei shuppan, 2007)

30.

The original version with the fuseji has been digitized because, unlike the canonical anthologized versions, it is no longer protected by copyright.

31.

Seikei, Gendai no baiburued.

32.

See, e.g.,

Mishima Yukio, “Fuseji” (1950), reprinted in Mishima Yukio zenshū, vol. 27 (Tokyo: Shinchosha, 2003)

33.

“Shōwa go nenjū ni okeru shuppan keisatsu gaikan,” reprinted in Shuppan keisatu gaikan, ed. Naimushō keihokyoku (Tokyo: Fuji shuppan, 1988), 1:91.

34.

Odagiri Hideo and Seikichi Fukuoka, eds., Shōwa shoseki zasshi shinbun hakkin nenpyō (Kawasaki-shi: Meiji Bunken Shiryō Kankōkai, 1981), 1:438.

35.

Ibid.

, 1:420. See also Japan,

Naimushō, Keihokyoku, Shuppan keisatsu gaikan: Shōwa 5–10-nen, ed. Fukkokuban (Tokyo: Ryūkei Shosha, 1981), 2:171.

Details on the textual difference given in

Kobayashi Takiji, Tō seikatsusha/ Chiku no hitobito/Numajiri mura, Aoki bunko 139 (Tokyo: Aoki Shoten, 1953)

. This paperback version has significantly more detailed textual notes than the version in the Complete Works of Kobayashi Takiji.

36.

Mr. M. is probably a reference to the Kaizō editor Minowa Renichi. Kōno Kensuke in email exchange with author, November 9, 2009.

37.

Kanbayashi Akatsuki, “Fuseji,” in Kanbayashi Akatsuki zenshū (Tokyo: Chikuma Shobō, 1966), 10:324–25.

38.

Kobayashi Takiji, “Kaidai,” in Tō seikatsusha/Chiku no hitobito/ Numajiri mura, 261.

39.

Kobayashi, Kobayashi Takiji zenshū (Tokyo: Shin Nippon shuppansha, 1982), 4:257;

Kobayashi, Tō seikatsusha/Chiku no hitobito/Numajiri mura, 10; Kaizō, April 1932, 61.

40.

Passage quoted with batsu glosses in

Naimushō keihokyoku, Shuppan keisatsuhō 12.51 (December 1932; Tokyo: Fuji Shuppan, 1981)

41.

Kobayashi, Numajiri mura, 48;

Kobayashi, Zenshū, 4:305;

Kobayashi, Tō seikatsusha/Chiku no hitobito/Numajiri mura, 56;

Kaizō May 1932, 37.

42.

Kobayashi, Kobayashi Takiji zenshū, 4:515.

43.

Kobayashi Takiji, Numajiri mura, Nihon Puroretaria Sakka Dōmei Sōsho (Tokyo: Nihon Puroretaria sakka dōmei shuppanbu, 1932), 2:39;

Kobayashi, Zenshū, 295;

Kobayashi, Tō seikatsusha/Chiku no hitobito/Numajiri mura, 46.

Kaizō, April 1932, 88.

44.

This phenomenon can also be seen in the fifty-sixth issue of the Publishing Police Records. The records on the banning of The Collected Works of Kobayashi Takiji in 1933 both replace some Xs rendering the characters glossed with Xs and giving some Xs as X. Shuppan keisatsuhō, 14.56:2.

45.

Tokuda Shūsei, “Moto no eda e,” Kaizō, September 1926, 217.

See also

Tokuda Shūsei, “Moto no eda e,” in Tokuda Shūsei zenshū (Tokyo: Yagi Shoten, 1997), 15:352.

46.

Tokuda Shūsei, “Sakuhin no kenetsu ni tsuite: futō na fuseji no mondai,” in Tokuda Shūsei zenshū (Tokyo: Yagi Shoten, 1997), 21:94–95.

47.

Jerome McGann, The Textual Condition (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991), 14, 76, 135.

48.

Kanbayashi Akatsuki, “Fuseji,” in Kanbayashi Akatsuki zenshū (Tokyo: Chikuma Shobō, 1966), 10:324–25.

49.

Kishi Sanji, “Ko,” Kaizō, August 1933.

Itō Jun has done a close textual comparison of the original manuscript and the Kaizō text. Itō Jun, “Puroretaria bungaku to Kishi Sanji: ‘Watashi no bungakushi’ o megutte,” Tokushima kenritsu bungaku shodō kan kenkyū kiyō (2000): 1. Also available at the “Kishi Sanji shiryōkan” webpage.

50.

See Kōno Kensuke, Kenetsu to bungaku. See also

Jay Rubin, Injurious to Public Morals: Writers and the Meiji State (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1984)

51.

The Naimushō copy of the banned edition held in the collection of Michigan State University was consulted for this finding. Though Michigan State University did not directly participate in the Sorting Project that resulted in the absorption of Naimushō volumes into American East Asian collections, it is likely that this copy was acquired through trades with University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, which did participate.

52.

The acts are deleted and replaced with introductions and the fuseji-like phrase “printing the rest of this plot is banned,”

Gendai Nihon bungaku zenshū (Tokyo: Kaizōsha, 1926), 47:457.

Then a note claims it was banned for referring to someone still living and potentially libelous,

Gendai Nihon bungaku zenshū (Tokyo: Kaizōsha, 1926), 47:495.

See the facsimile edition of Arasou futatsu no mono for details about Fujimori's travels.

Fujimori Seikichi, Arasou futatsu no mono, ed. Kuroko Kazuo, Shin-Puroretaria Bungaku Seisenshū (Tokyo: Yumani Shobō, 2004)

53.

Naimushō Keihōkyoku, Shuppan keisatsuhō 2.53 (February 1933; Tokyo: Fuji Shuppan, 1981), 5;

Fujimori Seikichi, Arasou futatsu no mono, ed. Kuroko Kazuo, Shin-Puroretaria Bungaku Seisenshū (Tokyo: Yumani Shobō, 2004), 26.

This latter book is a facsimile of the edition from 1933.

54.

Fujimori Seikichi, “Arasou futatsu no mono,” Kaizō, June 1932, 27.

55.

Edogawa Ranpo, “Mushi,” Kaizō, July 1929, 135.

, 125.

, 127.

Edogawa Ranpo, “Mushi,” in Edogawa Ranpo zenshū, Panorama tō kitan (Tokyo: Kōdansha, 1978), 3:301.

59.

The strike-through mark in the passage represents what the postwar editions delete without a trace.

60.

Edogawa, “Mushi,” in Kaizō, 138;

Edogawa Ranpo, “Mushi,” in Edogawa Ranpo zenshū, 295.

61.

Edogawa, “Mushi,” in Kaizō, 138;

Edogawa, “Mushi,” in Edogawa Ranpo zenshū, 295.

62.

Edogawa, “Mushi,” in Kaizō, 141;

Edogawa, “Mushi,” in Edogawa Ranpo zenshū, 298–99.

63.

Jerome McGann, The Textual Condition (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1991), 14, 76, 135.

64.

Tsukuda Takafumi, “Mitsu no ‘Manji’ hakkin ken'etsu no chūshin ni shite,” in Dōshisha kokubungaku (Kyōtō: Dōshisha Daigaku Kokubungakkai, 2008), 58–69,

quote at 69.

65.

Sabine Früshtūck, Colonizing Sex: Sexology and Social Control in Modern Japan (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003), 118–30;

Elise K. Tipton, “Birth Control and the Population Problem,” in Society and the State in Interwar Japan, ed. Elise K. Tipton (New York: Routledge, 1997), 42–62.

66.

Odagiri and Fukuoka, Shōwa shoseki, zasshi, 165.

67.

Tsukuda, “Mitsu no ‘Manji,’” 65.

68.

Tanizaki Jun'ichirō, “Manji: sono 35,” Kaizō, April 1930, 106–7;

Tanizaki Jun'ichirō, “Manji,” in Tanizaki Jun'ichirō zenshū (Tokyo: Chūō Kōronsha, 1982), 11:564–65;

Jun'ichirō Tanizaki, Quicksand, trans. Howard Hibbet (New York: Knopf, 1993), 219.

69.

Kanbayashi Atsuki, “Fuseji,” 10:322–23.

70.

Kuroshima Denji, “Uzumakeru karasu no mure,” Kaizō, February 1928, 50–51;

Kuroshima Denji, “Uzumakeru karasu no mure,” in Kuroshima Denji zenshū (Tokyo: Chikuma shobō, 1970), 1:270–71.

Translation modified from

Kuroshima Denji, “Flock of Swirling Crows,” in A Flock of Swirling Crows and Other Proletarian Writings, trans. Zeljko Cipris (Honolulu: Hawai'i University Press, 2005), 91.

71.

Sugimoto Tsutomu, Nihon mojishi no kenkyū, Sugimoto Tsutomu chosaku senshū (Tokyo: Yasakashobō, 1998), 432.

72.

Jacques Derrida, “Ulysses Gramophone: Hear Say Yes in Joyce,” in Acts of Literature, ed. Derek Attridge (New York: Routledge, 1992), 253–309.

73.

Gregory P. A. Levine, “On the Look and Logos of Zen Art,” “Silenced by Aesthetics? A Conjectural Poetics of Art History and Ecology,” Visual and Material Perspectives on East Asia Workshop, University of Chicago, January 28–31, 2009. See also

Bruce Rutledge, ed., Kuhaku & Other Accounts from Japan (Seattle: Chin Music Press, 2004)

, passim.

Chapter 8

Mishima Yukio, “Fuseji” (1950), reprinted in Mishima Yukio zenshū (Tokyo: Shinchosha, 2003), 27:303–4.

Noma Hiroshi, “Ken'etsu, Hakkin, Fuseji,” Gunzō 13.5 (1958): 236.

Ishikawa Tatsuzō, Ikiteiru heitai (Tokyo: Chūō Kōronsha, 1999), 206.

Ishikawa Tatsuzō, “Fuseji sakka no ben: sakka no yuku michi,” Yomiuri shinbun September 19, 1937, evening ed., 4.

Shuppan keisatsu hō, 111:64–79.

Translation modified from

Ishikawa Tatsuzō, “Ikiteiru heitai,” in Shōwa bungaku zenshū (Tokyo: Shōgakkan, 1986), 36:678;

Tatsuzō Ishikawa, Soldiers Alive, trans. Zeljko Cipris (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2003), 336.

See also

Ishikawa Tatsuzō, Ikiteiru heitai, Chūkō bunko (Tokyo: Chūo Kōronsha, 1999), 133.

Karen

Thornber, Empire of Texts in Motion: Chinese, Korean, and Taiwanese Transculturations of Japanese Literature (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2009), 190.

Publications and Broadcast Division, SCAP Civil Intelligence Section: Press, Censorship (Books), National Archives and Records Administration, NWCTM-331-UD1803–855, RG 331, UD 1803, Box 8655.

Odagiri Hideo, Hakkin sakuhinshū (Tokyo: Yakumo Shoten, 1948), 1

. See also comments to the effect that no publisher would accept the manuscript for the list of banned titles from 1965, not so much because of the essence of the contents, but because of the issue of profitability, and to the effect that the idea of appealing to the Ministry of Education (Monbushō) for help with publication would run counter to the work which opposed the national authorities; see

Odagiri Hideo and Fukuoka Seikichi, ed., Shōwa shoseki zasshi shinbun hakkin nenpyō (Kawasaki-shi: Meiji Bunken Shiryō Kankōkai, 1981), 1:1.

10.

Nakamura Mitsuo, “‘Ken'etsu seido’ no bōrei” (1951), reprinted in Nakamura Mitsuo zenshū (Tokyo: Chikuma Shobō, 1972), 12:538.

In a similar vein, Tezuka Hidetaka laments the maintenance of a banned books archive in the Ueno Library into the postwar.

Tezuka Hidetaka, “Hakkinbon no kura,” Shin Nihon bungaku (1950)

, reprinted in

Tezuka Hidetaka chosaku shū (Tokyo: Shin Nihon Shuppansha, 1982), 2:419.

11.

Nakano Shigeharu, “Sokkuri sono mama,” Kaizō, March 1946,

from the Gordon W. Prange Collection Magazines Microfiche, Gordon W. Prange Collection, East Asia Collection, McKeldin Library, University of Maryland at College Park.

12.

From the uncataloged censorship report at the Gordon W. Prange Collection, East Asia Collection, McKeldin Library, University of Maryland, College Park.

13.

Nakano Shigeharu, “Sokkuri sono mama.”

14.

Ibid.

15.

Andō Hiroshi, Tenbō Dazai Osamu (Tokyo: Gyōsei, 2009), 95–98.

See also

Kamiya Tadataka and Andō Hiroshi, Dazai Osamu zensakuhin kenkyū jiten (Tokyo: Benseisha, 1995)

;

Andō Hiroshi, Dazai Osamu, Nihon bungaku kenkyū ronbun shūsei 41 (Tokyo: Wakakusa shobō, 1998)

16.

Dazai Osamu, Pandora no hako (Tokyo: Sōei shobō, 1948)

, censorship examination copy #5560, held in the Gordon W. Prange Collection at the University of Maryland. Translation modified from

Donald Keene, Dawn to the West: Japanese Literature of the Modern Era, Fiction (New York: Columbia University Press, 1998), 1025.

See also

Andō Hiroshi, “Pandora no hako jihitsu kiakikomi hon no kōsatsu,” Shiryō to kenkyū 15.4 (2010)

17.

Phyllis Lyons, The Saga of Dazai Osamu: A Critical Study with Translations (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1985), 44–47, 150.

18.

“Dazai Osamu no 7 saku ni GHQ ken'etsu no ato, sakujo shiji mo, beidai ni shiryō,” Asahi shinbun, August 2, 2009;

Akira Hatano, “GHQ Censored Prewar Values from Works by Dazai,” Asahi shinbun, August 3, 2009.

19.

See the parallel with the fifteen-years' war in

George A. De Vos, Socialization for Achievement: Essays on the Cultural Psychology of the Japanese (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973), 540;

see also the connection with Kuno nenkan in Andō

Hiroshi, Tenbō Dazai Osamu (Tokyo: Gyōsei, 2009), 95–98.

20.

See

Shuppan keisatsu shitsumu kokoroe ed. Naimushō keihokyoku, March 1935, 19–20.

21.

Jō Ichirō, Kindan no sho: Sekai no hakkinbon korekushon, Kamenoko bukkusu (Tokyo: Shinhyōsha, 1972), 35–36.

22.

Keith Allen and Katie Buridge, ed., Euphemism and Dysphemism: Language Used as Shield and Weapon (New York: Oxford University Press, 1991), 115.

23.

While Latinizations have been common in English-language discourse from at least the 1500s, the Puritan Vice Societies gave rise to various modes in the United States in the 1920s. To be language that has the possibility of meaning something, language must also have the possibility of dissolving into nonmeaning, into its pure materiality. See

Paul de Man, Allegories of Reading: Figural Language in Rousseau, Nietzsche, Rilke, and Proust (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1979), 7.

24.

Kaneko Mitsuharu, “Santen,” in Ga, Zenshishū taisei, Gendai nihon shijin zenshū, ed. Susukida Kyūkin and Kanbara Ariake (Tokyo: Sōgensha, 1953), 95.

25.

Ibid.

, 95.

26.

Gennifer S. Weisenfeld, Mavo: Japanese Artists and the Avant-Garde, 1905–1931, Twentieth-Century Japan (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2002)

27.

Jennifer DeVere Brody, Punctuation: Art, Politics, and Play (Durham: Duke University Press, 2008), 29.

28.

Scott Richard Lyons, X-marks: Native Signatures of Assent (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2010)

29.

Tanikawa quoted in Nihon jikken eizō 40 nen shi (Osaka: Image Forum, 1994), 47.

30.

From

Steve Clark Ridgley, Japanese Counterculture: The Antiestablishment Art of Terayama Shuji (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2011), 41–51.

31.

Satō Tadao, Currents in Japanese Cinema (New York: Kodansha International, 1982), 35;

Iijima Tadashi, Senchū Eigashi: Shiki (Tokyo: MG Shuppan, 1984), 202–4, 279–81

;

Mamoru Makino, Nihon eiga ken'etsushi (Tōkyō: Pandora hatsubaisho gendai shokan, 2003), 496.

32.

Tashima Tarō, Ken'etsushitsu no yami ni tsubuyaku (1938), reprinted in Saisentan minshū goraku eiga bunken shiryōshū, ed. Makino Mamoru (Tokyo: Yumani Shobō, 2006), 18:85–90.

33.

Fujita Motohiko, “Muhōmatsu no kōsei to tēma,” in Eiga sakka: Itami Mansaku (Tokyo: Chikuma shobō, 1985), 171.

Makino, Nihon eiga ken'etsushi, 498.

34.

Makino, Nihon eiga ken'etsushi, 502.

35.

See

Jonathan Abel, “Packaging Desires: The Unmentionables of Japanese Film,” in Perversion and Modern Japan: Psychoanalysis, Literature, Culture, ed. Keith Vincent and Nina Cornyetz (New York: Routledge, 2009), 272–307.

Chapter 9

Alexander Gelley, Unruly Examples: On the Rhetoric of Exemplarity (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995)

Hans-Georg Gadamer, Truth and Method (New York: Seabury Press, 1975), 301–6, 435–68

Tachibana Takahirō, Kore ijō wa kinshi: Aru ken'etsu kakarichō no shuki (Tokyo: Senshinsha, 1932), 133–34.

Yamanoi Ryō [Ebisudani Harumatsu], “Nikushimi no ekkusu,” Napf 6 (1931)

, reprinted in Nihon puroretaria bungakushū, vol. 38,

Nihon puroretaria shishū (Tokyo: Shin Nihon Shuppansha, 1987), 1:377.

Tokuzō [Seta Sanrō], “Fuseji” (1936), reprinted in Nihon Puroretaria bungaku shū, hyakuman'nin no kōshō (Tokyo: Shin Nihon Shuppansha, 1987), 39:534–35.

See also

Judith Butler, Bodies That Matter: On the Discursive Limits of “Sex” (New York: Routledge, 1993), 210–14;

Azuma Hiroki, Sonzaironteki, yūbinteki: Jakku Derida ni tsuite (Tokyo: Shinchōsha, 1998), 119–46.

K nearly admits this in practice when he writes that “the question of transworld identification makes some sense.”

Saul A. Kripke, “Naming and Necessity,” in Semantics of Natural Language, ed. Donald Davidson and Gilbert Harman (Boston: D. Reidel, 1972), 271–72.

10.

Saul A. Kripke, Naming and Necessity (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1980), 41.

11.

Jean Luc Nancy, Being Singular Plural, trans. Robert D. Richardson and Anne E. O'Byrne (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2000)

;

Jean Luc Nancy, The Inoperative Community, Theory and History of Literature 76 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1991)

12.

Nakano Shigeharu, “Bunshō o uru koto sono hoka,” Shinchō, September 1929, reprinted in Nakano Shigeharu zenshū (Tokyo: Chikuma Shobō, 1977), 9:268.

13.

Hatanaka Shigeo, Oboegaki Shōwa shuppan dan'atsu shōshi (Tokyo: Tosho Shinbunsha, 1965), 171.

14.

Ibid.

, 172.

15.

Ōya Sōichi, Hayashi Fusao, Yokomitsu Riichi, Kataoka Teppei, and Kaneko Yōbun, “Fuseji mondai ni oite,” Shincho 26.5 (May 1929): 134.

16.

Nakano Shigeharu, “Seiji to geijutsu,” in Puroretaria geijutsu kyōtei, ed. Chitarō Yohena (Tokyo: Sekaisha, 1929)

;

Nakano Shigeharu, “Seiji to geijutsu,” in Nakano Shigeharu zenshū (Tokyo: Chikuma shobō, 1977), 9:253–60.

17.

What readers of the postwar versions have encountered is more like a fuseji, an editorial comment that “five lines were deleted from the original” or “221 characters were given fuseji.”

Nakano, Nakano Shigeharu zenshū, 9:254.

This example is a complete reversal of the myth of deletion in Japan discussed in chapter 8; here the prewar edition suffered an unmarked deletion, while the postwar reprints carried marked deletion. But the degree to which the prewar deletion, which left a white space on the page, can be said to have been “silent” is debatable.

18.

Karl Marx, “On Freedom of the Press: Freedom in General” (1842)

, available on the Marxist Internet Archive.

19.

Vladimir Lenin, preface to The Lessons of Crisis, Pravda 38 (May 6, 1917)

, reprinted in

Lenin Collected Works (Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1964), 24:213–16;

Yokote Kazuhiko and Jonathan Abel, “Nakano Shigeharu ‘Seiji to geijutsu’—fuseji honbun to sono fukugen,” Bungaku Hihyō Josetsu 3.4 (November 2009): 138–49.

20.

Nakano, Nakano Shigeharu zenshū, 9:264.

21.

Ruth Rogaski, Hygienic Modernity: Meanings of Health and Disease in Treaty-Port China, Asia, Local Studies/Global Themes (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004), 229.

22.

Nakano, Nakano Shigeharu zenshū, 9:264.

23.

Silverberg's discussion of this essay emphasizes the commodity function of this essay because of her interest in connecting it to Benjamin's idea on commodity and the reproduction of art.

Miriam Rom Silverberg, Changing Song: The Marxist Manifestos of Nakano Shigeharu (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990), 127–31.

24.

Nakano, Nakano Shigeharu zenshū, 9:265.

, 9:266.

, 9:267.

Michael G. Levine, Writing through Repression: Literature, Censorship, Psychoanalysis (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1994), 28.

31.

Cited in

ibid.

32.

Nakano, Shigeharu zenshū, 9:267.

33.

Ibid.

, 1:101. For similarly brutal depictions of police activities, see

Onchi Terutake [Kimura Shigeo], “Ken'etsuri ni,” Puroretaria shi, February 1931, reprinted in Nihon puroretaria bungaku shū (Tokyo: Shin Nihon Shuppansha, 1987), 28:198;

Onchi Terutake, “Yume to hakkotsu to no seppun,” in Onchi Terutake shishū (Tokyo: Shin Nihon Shijinsha, 1961), 16–37;

Taki Shigeru, “Gōmon o taeru uta” (1929), reprinted in Nihon puroretaria bungaku taikei (Tokyo: San'ichi shobō, 1954), 3:462.

34.

Heinrich Heine, “Hassan,” in The Poetical Works of Heinrich Heine: Now First Completely Rendered into English Verse, in Accordance with the Original Forms (London: Villon Society, 1911), 247.

35.

So far as I can tell, Heine never used a similar phrase to discuss censorship. I've also consulted the Heine scholars Michael Levine and Kiba Hiroshi in search of any such reference in Heineken's works in German and Japanese but to no avail.

36.

Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, preface to Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism: A Popular Outline, available on the website of the Marxists Internet Archive

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Ästhetik: Mit Einem Einführenden Essay, ed. György Lukács, Klassisches erbe aus Philosophie und Geschichte (Berlin: Aufbau-Verlag, 1955), 1:376.

40.

Paul de Man, “Dialogue and Dialogism,” in The Resistance to Theory, Theory and History of Literature 33 (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1986), 106–14.

41.

Lev Loseff, On the Beneficence of Censorship: Aesopian Language in Modern Russian Literature, Arbeiten und Texte zur Slavistik 31 (München: Sagner, 1984)

42.

Mark Sanders, Complicities: The Intellectual and Apartheid, Philosophy and Postcoloniality (Durham: Duke University Press, 2002)

43.

Homi K. Bhabha, “Sly Civility,” in The Location of Culture (New York: Routledge, 1994), 132–44.

44.

Leo Strauss, Persecution and the Art of Writing (Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1952)

;

de Man, “Dialogue and Dialogism,” 106–14.

45.

Nakano, Nakano Shigeharu zenshū, 9:267.

46.

Jacques Lacan, “The Instance of the Letter in the Unconscious,” in Écrits: The First Complete Edition in English, trans. Bruce Fink (New York: W.W. Norton, 2006), 414.

47.

See

Annabel Patterson, “Postscript,” in Reading between the Lines (New York: Routledge, 1993) 325.

48.

Nakano Shigeharu, “Shōsetsu no kakenu shōsetsuka,” Kaizō, January 1936, 14–15;

Nakano, Nakano Shigeharu zenshū, 2:135–36.

49.

My use of the word crossing is meant to evoke at least two meanings: first, the idea of cross-pollinating or interbreeding two disparate species; second, the action of crossing out, deleting, or X-ing.

Chapter 10

Frederic Jameson, The Political Unconscious (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1981), 9.

Harry Harootunian, History's Disquiet: Modernity, Cultural Practice, and the Question of Everyday Life (New York: Columbia University Press, 2000), 22.

Ibid.

, 16.

Jameson's later concept of a “singular modernity” is but one method of bracketing the injunction to always historicize to arrive at a new, more broad, and no less radical historicization. In fact, the return to the global in Jameson's later work evokes precisely the call necessary for Asian Studies.

Frederic Jameson, A Singular Modernity: Essay on the Ontology of the Present (New York: Verso, 2002)

Tachibana Takashi, “Genron no jiyū” vs. “●●●” (Tokyo: Bungei shunjū: 2004), passim

One need only consider the case of Mishimaken's After the Banquet and Yu Miriken's Fish Swimming in Stones to see this. See

Philip Brasor, “A Responsible Attitude Needed toward ‘Privacy,’” Japan Times, April 4, 2004.

Anne C. Henry, “Ellipsis Marks in a Historical Perspective,” in The Motivated Sign: Iconicity in Language and Literature 2, ed. Olga Fischer and Max Nänny (Philadelphia: John Benjamins, 2001), 138–47.

See also

Carl Purington Rollins, “Not Many Asterisks,” Saturday Review of Literature 9 (November 12, 1932): 246:

“It seems possible to hope that at no very distant day the asterisk will again return to its proper place as a guide to light and learning, and cease to be an obscurantist symbol.”

James Branch Cabell, Figure of Earth (New York: Robert M. McBride, 1925), 178.

Shakespeare “censored” in Robert Carleton Brown, Gems: A Censored Anthology (Cagnes-surmer: Roving Eye, 1931), 45.

The Jimmy Kimmel Show's This Week in Unnecessary Censorship—where deletions and bleeps makes puritan, straight-faced pundits and politicians appear to launch into sexual or subversive epithets—is to post-9/11 redaction what Robert Carleton Brown's Gems was to censorship of the US press during World War I. That is to say, in the context of war and rigid overt censors, they call attention to the fact that censorship more dangerous, more funny. Today it seems like an old tired joke.

10.

Thurman Wesley Arnold, Fair Fights and Foul: A Dissenting Lawyer's Life (New York: Harcourt, 1965), 176.

See

also Perrin, Dr. Bowdler's Legacy: A History of Expurgated Books in England and America (New York: Scribner, 1969), 244.

11.

Rollins, “Not Many Asterisks,” 246.

12.

Dorothy Parker, “Sex—Without the Asterisks,” Esquire 50.4 (October 1958): 102–3.

13.

Barbara Weinstein, “The AHA and Academic Freedom in the Age of Homeland Security, Revisited,” Perspectives, December 2007, available on website of the American Historical Association.

14.

Maureen Dowd, “Weapons of Mass Redaction,” New York Times, July 23, 2003;

“CIA Realizes It's Been Using Black Highlighters All These Years,” Onion, November 30, 2005.

15.

Gray v. Maryland Certiorari, “To The Court Of Appeals Of Maryland,” No. 96–8653,

Supreme Court of The United States,

Kevin D. Gray, Petitioner v. Maryland, “On Writ Of Certiorari To The Court Of Appeals Of Maryland,” March 9, 1998.

16.

Jenna Osman, Essay in Asterisks (Philadelphia: Roof Books, 2004), 13.

17.

If Francis Fukuyama's The End of History and the Last Man, Allan Bloom's The Closing of the American Mind, and Lynne Cheney's Telling the Truth share a common ancestor with the decision making of Clarence Thomas, Paul Wolfowitz, William Bennet, and John R. Bolton, it is certainly to be found in Strauss's classroom.

Michael A. Peters, “Leo Strauss and the Neoconservative Critique of the Liberal University Postmodernism, Relativism and the Culture Wars,” Critical Studies in Education 49.1 (March 2008): 11–32.

10.1080/17508480701813524

18.

Arthur M. Melzer, “Esotericism and the Critique of Historicism,” The American Political Science Review 100.2 (2006)

10.1017/S0003055406062162

. Here my argument is somewhat anticipated by

Michael L. Frazer, “Esotericism Ancient and Modern: Strauss Contra Straussianism on the Art of Political-Philosophical Writing,” Political Theory 34.1 (February 2006): 33–61.

10.1177/0090591705277770

19.

“The problem with such a methodology [esotericism] is that it assumes philosophers are captive to the ideas of their time and place, the very sort of historicist thinking that Strauss (at least exoterically) opposes so adamantly in so many of his writings. The truly wise will break free from the opinions of both the masses and of the intellectual elite of their day, and come to embrace the truth as it really is. Since a student of Strauss is interested in reading esoteric texts written by the truly wise, we cannot develop a Straussian hermeneutic for these works until we have established which of the two accounts is (according to Strauss) the true account.”

Frazer, “Esotericism Ancient and Modern,” 38.

20.

Alexandre Kojève, “The Emperor Julian and His Art of Writing,” in Ancients and Moderns: Essays on the Tradition of Political Philosophy in Honor of Leo Strauss, ed. Joseph Cropsey (New York: Basic, 1964)

21.

Ibid.

, 162.

22.

Annabel Patterson, Reading between the Lines (New York: Routledge, 1993), 22–30, 322–25

23.

Walter Benjamin, “Theses on the Philosophy of History,” in Illuminations (New York: Schocken: 1969), 256.

24.

Barbara Johnson, “Double Mourning in the Public Sphere: Prosopopoeia and Free Speech,” in The Wake of Deconstruction, Bucknell Lectures in Literary Theory Series 11 (Cambridge: Blackwell, 1994) 38.

25.

Frederic Jameson, Seeds of Time (New York: Columbia University Press, 1996), 130–87;

Jameson, The Political Unconscious, 254–83.

26.

Michael Holquist, “Corrupt Originals: The Paradox of Censorship,” Literature and Censorship Issue, special issue, PMLA 109.1 (1994)

27.

Raiford Guins, Edited Clean Version: Technology and the Culture of Control (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2009)

28.

Tachibana Kōshirō [Takahirō], “Hatsubai kinshi no mandan: Nazo no fuseji,” Shomotsu tenbō 2.9 (September 1932)

Download all slides

Metrics

Total Views 11

8 Pageviews

3 PDF Downloads

Since 2/1/2023

Month:	Total Views:
February 2023	1
July 2023	1
August 2023	2
April 2024	3
June 2024	2
August 2024	2

Contents

Notes

Introduction

Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Chapter 9

Chapter 10

Email alerts

Contents

Notes

Introduction

Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6

Chapter 7

Chapter 8

Chapter 9

Chapter 10

Email alerts

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only